Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
Jeff Fisher wrote: >Pierre Ancelot wrote: > > >>I'm afraid i have to change my system, i rnu drbd/NFS/heartbeat on a >>linux 2.6. >>It HANGS if i ever do anything that overloads it a little and it keeps >>on hanging bad, all my cluster becomes unavailable... (too bad for an >>high availability cluster). >>On worst cases i have to reboot all my nodes. >>I even think about having an SMB share so bad it goes... >>Any idea what's going on ? maybe a config issue of NFS >>Maybe, as i have read recently, NFS on linux sucks. >>Any alternative viable ? i can't let this cluster run on doubts. >> >> > >When I tested samba + drbd + keepalived, if I pulled the plug on the >primary and caused a failover to the secondary -- there was massive data >corruption when using samba. > >Does anyone use drbd + samba and have it handle failovers nicely? > Imo this can't be done because Samba is stateful. When you replicate the NFS administration (/var/lib/nfs) on a drbd'ed partition you obtain HA read&writes on your NFS clients. When you apply that knowledge to your Samba serving problem you might want to add a translation cluster in-front of your drbd HA-NFS fileservers (SMB->NFS). Although you still have a point of failure you can extend the amount of storage space by huge amounts while spreading the risk and reducing the Samba administration. The node which handles the Samba service needs to be very stable (hotswap mirrored root disk / hotswap PSU's). Just a thought, Leroy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20060228/832bbb73/attachment.htm>