Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 03:41:46PM -0500, Artur (eBoundHost) wrote: > We're getting ready to test a drbd + nfs system in production and i > started looking into iscsi. Thought of something that i couldn't find > an answer to on google, maybe i'm not looking hard enough (not on the > first 5 results) > > Why not have 2 storage systems exporting iscsi and simply software md > raid the exports on a target system? This would take out complexity of > drbd and heartbeat entirely, no? > > Only thing i can think against this setup is it pushes lots of bandwidth > to both storage servers, but assuming that network is already in place > this should not be a barrier. And yes, it would require an additional > 1gb nic on the target server (1 from each storage system) > > I'm definitely not going with this setup because drbd works great, but > still looking for anything you can say about why my scenario would not > be a good idea. think about what can go wrong. and how to recover from that. what if ... one target breaks one link breaks one initiator breaks how to do a failover. do a failback. determine "better" (more recent) data. determine resync direction. determine which areas of the disks to sync. determine data divergence. I think in all areas drbd does better than nbd/iscsi + md raid1, but I am happy to hear all ideas, and use them as inspiration for future linux storage replication solutions. -- : Lars Ellenberg : LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability : DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria. __ please don't Cc me, but send to list -- I'm subscribed