On 7/23/2011 4:30 AM, Emmanuel Florac wrote: > Le Wed, 20 Jul 2011 22:03:33 +0800 vous écriviez: > >> I know it would be better if I can use Lustre but my interconnection >> is a little slow. I suspect if it is feasible if using such parallel >> file system. >> >> Does anyone has good idea on this deployment? >> > > For this kind of setup, true cluster filesystems like Lustre, > PVFS2/OrangeFS, Gluster, Ceph... would be much better. Striping 20 > iSCSI volumes across would be awfully dangerous. > > I'd go with OrangeFS (pvfs.org) because I'm pretty happy with it so far > (using XFS as the underlying local filesystem). It's precisely made to > agreggate computing clusters storage. Typically one starts looking at hardware solutions after identifying the needs of the target application/workload. Is the proposed storage cluster system simply a proof of concept testbed, or will it actually be tasked with real work? If the latter I'd rethink your iSCSI export to NFS server idea. You mentioned only 8 disks. Just drop them directly into the NFS host and avoid many potential headaches down the road. -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
