From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from 220-245-31-42.static.tpgi.com.au ([220.245.31.42]:33098 "EHLO smtp.sws.net.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751273AbaF0XkG (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jun 2014 19:40:06 -0400 Received: from xev.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.sws.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 503EF20207 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 2014 09:40:03 +1000 (EST) From: Russell Coker To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: russell@coker.com.au Subject: Re: [Question] Btrfs on iSCSI device Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 09:40:02 +1000 Message-ID: <2173101.6G0fsERxkf@xev> In-Reply-To: <53AD9D1A.4050703@libero.it> References: <53AD9D1A.4050703@libero.it> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 18:34:34 Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: > I don't think that it is possible to mount the _same device_ at the _same > time_ on two different machines. And this doesn't depend by the filesystem. If you use a clustered filesystem then you can safely mount it on multiple machines. If you use a non-clustered filesystem it can still mount and even appear to work for a while. It's surprising how many writes you can make to a dual- mounted filesystem that's not designed for such things before you get a totally broken filesystem. On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 13:15:16 Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote: > The reason it appears to work when using iSCSI and not with directly > connected parallel SCSI or SAS is that iSCSI doesn't provide low level > hardware access. I've tried this with dual-attached FC and had no problems mounting. In what way is directly connected SCSI different from FC? -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/