> > Another alternative is Lustre. It is a filesystem which purports to be > able to aggregate the disks of multiple storage computers into one or > more gigantic filesystems. It isn't stable for us, but it may be > someday. :) The Lustre vendor claims to be able to break not just the > 2T barrier, but also the 16T barrier. We do have a lustre filesystem of > over 16T set up now, but it remains to be seen what will happen when we > actually put over 16T of -data- in it. > > Another option may be the "LBD" patches. I haven't tried them, nor even > studied about them. You can use PVFS2 (http://www.pvfs.org/pvfs2/) to aggregate disks from multiple servers into on big file system. Though PVFS2 is specifically designed for parallel applications, and may not be suited for your purposes. You can sort-of do it with AFS (http://www.openafs.org), with mutiple file servers servicing the same name space. AFS is again rather different from an "ordinary" file system, however. I know you can do it with IBM's GPFS (http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/clusters/software/gpfs.html); we use GPFS here on two servers attached to an IBM SAN to create a 6.5T file system. But if you decide to take a run at GPFS, don't blame me. David S. > _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
