Re: High-availability question

Hubert Tonneau (hubert.tonneau@heliosam.fr)
Wed, 28 Jul 1999 12:39:07 +0200

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Matthew Kirkwood: "Re: New raw IO patches available for 2.2, 2.3"
Previous message: Patrick Lerda: "Linux 2.2.9: Big Endian Processor and ext2fs corruption (PowerPC)"
Maybe in reply to: Scott White: "High-availability question"

> Willy Tarreau <willy@novworld.Novecom.Fr> writes:
>
> > You could physically share the same SCSI disks array :
> >
> > 2 hosts connected to the same disk array, only one mounts the FS R/W, the
> > other one mounts them R/O (or does not mount them), and when a problem is
> > detected, the backup mounts the FS R/W (in case of some crashes, you'll
> > have to do FSCK before that), and does the IPAT.
>
> I've thought about that, but then the SCSI array becomes a fail point.. I'm
> trying to avoid that.

What I don't understand is why CODA filesystem is never evaluated for such
senario. It seems that mirorring over several boxes is in it's basic
specifications ! What's wrong with it ?

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Matthew Kirkwood: "Re: New raw IO patches available for 2.2, 2.3"
Previous message: Patrick Lerda: "Linux 2.2.9: Big Endian Processor and ext2fs corruption (PowerPC)"
Maybe in reply to: Scott White: "High-availability question"