[CentOS] gnbd vs drbd

[Johnny Hughes]

On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 00:59 -0200, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Up until now, I have been using drbd for file custers with great success.
> Yes, it is a PITA, and sometimes you can get annoying sincronization
> issues (mostly on lab situations).
> 
> Now I have been considering giving gnbd (with cs/gfs) a try.
> 
> Do any of you ever crossed this path ? Any comparisons or comments ?

I use drbd, but that is because I am doing exactly what it was designed
for (creating a backup, failover server ... setting side-by-side with a
crossover cable in case of server failure).

I have no experience using gnbd for that, so I really can't comment on
whether it might be better.

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20061107/4f258c29/attachment.sig>