Well, it was a success today! I've got 3 systems I'm playing with. One is a dual Xeon workstation with an IDE drive as the OS drive, and a SCSI Ultra-320 drive for "data". OS is Red Hat 8.0 GPL, kernel is 2.4.18-24.8.0 (from Red Hat). One is a dual Xeon 2u rack server. One Ultra-160 harddrive for the OS, one Ultra-160 harddrive for "data". OS is Red Hat 8.0 GPL, kernel is 2.4.18-24.8.0 (from Red Hat). The third system is a single p4 system, 2u rack, 2 Ultra-160 disks for the OS. On the first 2 systems, I have installed the HyperSCSI rpms (rebuilt for SMP), and configured them both to share out the "data" drive, as part of the "pogolan" group. No partition table is on either of these drives. On the 3'rd system, I installed the HyperSCSI rpm, and configured it as a client, of the "pogolan" group. The client was able to see 2 disks, /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd. On the client, I created LVM physical volumes on both /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd. Then I created an LVM Volume Group, "pogolan", that included both /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd. I then created an LVM Logical Volume, "pogo_lan" that took up the entire space of the Volume Group. (30~ megs, from 2 18gig drives, one in each of the 2 "server" systems). I then created an ext3 file system on /dev/pogolan/pogo_lan. I was then able to mount /dev/pogolan/pogo_lan to /mnt/pogolan and write data to it!! Initial hdparm readings are pretty good. -t gives ~8MB/s transfer rate. -T gives over 300MB/s. Keep in mind, this is on an existing 10/100Mb/s hubbed network, with plenty of traffic. I've effectively reached the limit of the network, and I will have to move to a GigE network to get full speeds. This is all very cool to me. I'm now trying to research the supposed failover capability of HyperSCSI so that I can configure an entire system as a failover system, for decent redundancy. I'm also looking into using Red Hat Advanced Server on 2 client systems so that I can have a HA failover cluster for serving NFS/SMB off of the LVM volumes. I also want to try adding in another HyperSCSI server, and extending the LVM Volume Group and perhaps extending some of the LVM LV's or adding new LV's to the group. All in all, I have to say that HyperSCSI was VERY easy to setup, and I'm looking forward to setting up some advanced storage clusters using HyperSCSI technology. One would assume that you could put OpenGFS on top of the shared disks. The only catch is that HyperSCSI can not be a server and a client at the same time. Any who, if anybody is interested, I can try to setup OpenGFS on these systems and let you know the results. -- Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE http://geek.j2solutions.net Mondo DevTeam (www.mondorescue.org) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating -- Psyche-list mailing list Psyche-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
