[lvm] multi-LUNs storage for mbox : one or many FS?

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

 



Hello,

We are re-thinking the storage of our dovecot mailserver (mbox format). We decided to create one LUN on each of our RAID (we have 5 x RAID-5 on a SAN), from there we see two possibilities :

 1) creating 5 x VG/LV and filesystems, one for each LUN

* advantages : we insure that every files stored on the FS remains on the same RAID (disks), we can also control the "distribution" of the mailboxes on every RAID, if a RAID becomes very solicited, we can move the data elsewhere.

* drawback : we have to monitor and expand 5 independents filesystems (we can expect a large number of LUNs after a few expands)


 2) creating a single-big VG/LV/FS spread on all LUNs

* advantages : we optimize disk occupation with one filesystem and it will be very easy to expand and monitor

* drawback (?) : a mailbox can theoretically have its data present on every RAID, I'm not sure if it's a good or a bad thing, mbox files are big compared to Maildir but we rarely need to read them entirely

* drawback : a very bad failure (multiple disks crashing) can compromise the entire storage. Also, we have no control on where the data are, in case of bad performances, it will be difficult to place data "elsewhere" as far as we only have a single FS.

It's a bit OT question because it's not specific to Red Hat, but I think this is a good place to ask.

Regards,

Nicolas

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list


[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [Kernel Development]     [PAM]     [Fedora Users]     [Red Hat Development]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Linux Admin]     [Gimp]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Yosemite News]     [Red Hat Crash Utility]


  Powered by Linux