From: Christopher Smith <csmith@nighthawkrad.net>
To: mjstumpf@pobox.com
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Problems with software RAID + iSCSI or GNBD
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:09:45 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42C202E9.40504@nighthawkrad.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42C17540.3000709@pobox.com>
Michael Stumpf wrote:
> I probably can't help much at the moment, but...
>
> I didn't realize that NBD type things had advanced to even this level of
> stability. This is good news. I've been wanting to do something like
> what you're trying for some time to overcome the bounds of
> power/busses/heat/space that limit you to a single machine when building
> a large md or LVM. Looking at the GNBD project page, it still seems
> pretty raw, although a related project DDRAID seems to hold some promise.
>
> I'd be pretty timid about putting anything close to production on these
> drivers, though.
>
> What distro / kernel version / level of GNBD are you using?
Well, I don't know if they have yet - the main reason I'm fiddling with
this is to see if it's feasible :).
However, I have belted tens of gigabytes of data at the mirror-over-GNBD
and mirror-over-iSCSI using various benchmarking tools without any
kernel panics or (apparent) data corruption, so I'm gaining confidence
that it's a workable solution. I haven't yet started the same level of
testing with Windows and Linux clients sitting above the
initiator/bridge level yet, however, as I want to make sure the back end
is pretty stable before moving on (as it will become a - relatively -
single point of failure for most of the important machines in our
network, and hence the entire company).
I'm just using a stock Fedora Core 4 and the GNBD it includes. A bit
bleeding edge, I know, but I figured since it had just been released
when I started on this project, why not ;).
With regards to the problem I was having with node failures, at least
with iSCSI the solution was setting a timeout so that a "disk failed"
error was actually returned - by default the iSCSI initiator assumes any
disconnection errors are network-related and transient, so it simply
stops any IO to the iSCSI target until it reappears. Now that I've
specified a timeout, node "failures" behave as expected and the mirror
goes into degraded mode.
I assume I need to do something similar with GNBD so that it really does
"fail", rather than "hang", but I've been too busy over the last few
days to actually look into it.
CS
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-29 2:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-27 2:42 Problems with software RAID + iSCSI or GNBD Christopher Smith
2005-06-28 16:05 ` Michael Stumpf
2005-06-29 2:09 ` Christopher Smith [this message]
2005-06-29 1:11 ` Paul Clements
2005-06-29 4:42 ` Christopher Smith
2005-06-29 14:40 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-06-29 15:24 ` David Dougall
2005-06-29 15:59 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-06-30 18:05 ` J. Ryan Earl
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=42C202E9.40504@nighthawkrad.net \
--to=csmith@nighthawkrad.net \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjstumpf@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).