Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On 14/08/2013 15:58, Christian Völker wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm planning to use DRBD in a production environment. I prefer to use > CentOS as base system. > > The reason to use drbd is the synchronisation, not the high availability. > We'll have two locations connected through a 100Mbit line. On both > locations users will access the data at the same time. So I know I have > to use a cluster aware filesystem. You mean, you are planning to use DRBD in dual-master mode?? Why not just have all the accesses go to one master node in one data centre? Then you can use a regular filesystem, with something like NFS on top, and you can still replicate to a slave. Perhaps you expecting a very read-heavy workload, and you want all reads to take place from the nearer copy? Using DRBD + dual master + GFS is a risky way of achieving this, and as the GFS nodes will have to communicate to grab locks anyway, it may not have much better latency than the simple case. > Which filesystem is recommended? GFS? ZFS (experimental?)? Apples and oranges. GFS and OCFS2 are cluster-aware filesystems which you may be able to use in a multi-master scenario - if you are braver than me. ZFS is a standard filesystem which you could only use in a single-master setup. The Linux ZFS port is also a somewhat risky option; if you want to use ZFS I'd suggest FreeBSD (or a FreeBSD-based appliance like FreeNAS) Regards, Brian.