Have you looked at parallel filesystems such as Lustre and fhgfs?
On 18 May 2014 01:14, Steve Thompson smt@vgersoft.com wrote:
On Sun, 18 May 2014, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
Why specifically do you care about that? Both with your solution and the DRBD one the clients only see a NFS endpoint so what does it matter that this endpoint is placed on one of the storage systems?
The whole point of the exercise is to end up with multiple block devices on a single system so that I can combine them into one VG using LVM, and then build a single file system that covers the lot. On a budget, of course.
Also while with you solution streaming performance may be ok latency is going to be fairly terrible due to the round-trips and synchronicity required so this may be a nice setup for e.g. a backup storage system but not really suited as a more general purpose solution.
Yes, I hear what you are saying. However, I have investigated MooseFS and GlusterFS using the same resources, and my experimental iscsi-based setup gives a file system that is *much* faster than either in practical use, latency notwithstanding.
Steve _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos