On 20.11.2012 01:15, Ted Miller wrote: > On 11/19/2012 12:12 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Ted Miller<tedlists at sbcglobal.net> >> wrote: >>> >>> If RHSS is not available or suitable, other suggestions welcome. I >>> need a >>> file system/server with: >>> >>> * primary function is serving MP3 files for playback in a radio >>> station >>> environment in Haiti >>> * if the system goes down all your clients (listeners) know >>> it >>> * they know it NOW >>> * they know how long it takes to get it back up >>> * High Availability as the primary concern >>> * ability to administrate via web interface or similar by >>> non-Linux-savvy >>> IT staff. >>> * ability to grow file system from 2-3TB to 20-50TB by simply >>> adding disks >>> and/or adding 'bricks' >>> * clients will all be Windows computers, so files accessible by >>> CIFS >>> * critical application is read-only >>> * prefer a system that would continue serving files even if the >>> network >>> goes down (but have not found such a system yet for Windows >>> clients). >> >> Is it possible to change the application so it uses http to get >> content or uses a distributed database natively? Distributed >> failure-tolerant systems are a lot easier if you don't even try to >> provide filesystem semantics that require a lot of atomic >> operations. >> > Application is commercial, not changeable. It wants to see a local > drive, > if possible. Will tolerate (with warnings) a network share. Most of > the > critical operations are read-only (play back a file on the air). Then it looks like GlusterFS is your only choice. Otherwise Openstack Swift might have worked, too, if it hadn't been HTTP only. -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro