Re: possibly silly question (raid failover)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Robin Hill wrote:
Sorry, my mistake - it should be -p n3, or -p n4. You'll want -p f6/-p
f8 to get a far configuration though, but yes, that should give good
redundancy against a single node failure.

which then leaves the question of whether the md driver, itself, can be
failed over from one node to another

I don't see why not. You'll probably need to force assembly though, as
it's likely the devices will be slightly out-of-synch after the node
failure.


sort of would expect to have to resynch

has anybody out there actually tried this at some point?

I've been trying to find OCF resource agents for handling a RAID failover, and only coming up with deprecated functions with little documentation - the only thing that even sounds remotely close is a heartbeat2 "md group take over" resource agent, but all I can find are references to it, no actual documentation

Miles


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In<fnord>  practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux