From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id iAK28Pr16984 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:08:25 -0500 Received: from polop.usc.edu (polop.usc.edu [128.125.10.9]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAK28Ib7020411 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:08:19 -0500 Received: from polop.usc.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by polop.usc.edu (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAK288Wp001731 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:08:08 -0800 Received: (from garrick@localhost) by polop.usc.edu (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id iAK287nk001729 for linux-lvm@redhat.com; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:08:07 -0800 Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:08:07 -0800 From: Garrick Staples Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] HA Fileserver configuration recommendation sought. Message-ID: <20041120020807.GP3139@polop.usc.edu> References: <1100857645.13422.99.camel@grma-lap> <1100888487.4379.9.camel@tesuji.nac.uci.edu> <20041119192447.GB10969@nile.gs.washington.edu> <1100909625.4379.51.camel@tesuji.nac.uci.edu> <20041120002207.GK3139@polop.usc.edu> <1100914586.4379.75.camel@tesuji.nac.uci.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="3lEnBJ3eT4fJ0mBo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1100914586.4379.75.camel@tesuji.nac.uci.edu> Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: To: LVM general discussion and development --3lEnBJ3eT4fJ0mBo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 05:36:26PM -0800, Dan Stromberg alleged: > > > My understanding is that IBM will only support GPFS on IBM hardware... > >=20 > > Nor is it really FOSS. >=20 > I see. Is it kind of like the Sun Java or Mozilla licenses? Last I checked, which has been while now, it was binary-only download; built for only a few specific RH kernels. Checking now, it's up on developerworks with a BSD license, but I don't actually see any released files. I'm half-way sure someone is going to correct me here :) =20 > > Ultimately, it seems to me that GFS over clustered LVM is the way to go= ; though > > all the bits don't seem to be quite in place just yet. >=20 > What's this "clustered LVM" thing? Is it the same as (or built upon) > NBD/ENBD? Does it have the 2 terabyte or 16 terabyte limits? Google > just turns up some mailing list hits at the top - is there a "stable" > release of CLVM yet? Cluster extensions for LVM. Given shared storage, a few configs, and runni= ng clvmd, you can activate LVs on multiple machines at once. This is great for GFS, where it replaces the gfs "pools". http://sources.redhat.com/cluster/ As I said, not all of the right bits seem to be in place yet. But I expect RHE4 to be very capable in this department. --=20 Garrick Staples, Linux/HPCC Administrator University of Southern California --3lEnBJ3eT4fJ0mBo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBnqcH0SBUxJbm9HMRAs/RAJ9/zj7mt/A4bATtF2E4pl2euH6JhQCgsY94 yKErblLbdqyirc4+w/ZH/qA= =ovGW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3lEnBJ3eT4fJ0mBo--