Re: freebsd-cluster Digest, Vol 124, Issue 1
Andrei Manescu <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.freebsd.devel.cluster |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Any docs on gcluster ??? 2009/6/25 <[email protected]> > Send freebsd-cluster mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-cluster > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of freebsd-cluster digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Fail-over SAN setup: ZFS, NFS, and ...? (Freddie Cash) > 2. Re: Fail-over SAN setup: ZFS, NFS, and ...? (Elliot Finley) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:35:25 -0700 > From: Freddie Cash <[email protected]> > Subject: Fail-over SAN setup: ZFS, NFS, and ...? > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > [Not exactly sure which ML this belongs on, as it's related to both > clustering and filesystems. If there's a better spot, let me know and I'll > update the CC:/reply-to.] > > We're in the planning stages for building a multi-site, fail-over SAN setup > which will be used to provide redundant storage for a virtual machine > setup. > The setup will be like so: > [Server Room 1] . [Server Room 2] > ----------------- . ------------------- > . > [storage server] . [storage server] > | . | > | . | > [storage switch] . [storage switch] > \----fibre----/ | > . | > . | > . [storage aggregator] > . | > . | > . /---[switch]---\ > . | | | > . | [VM box] | > . | | | > . [VM box] | | > . | | [VM box] > . | | | > . [network switch] > . | > . | > . [internet] > > Server room 1 and server room 2 are on opposite ends of town (about 3 km) > with a dedicated, direct-link, fibre link between them. There will be a > set > of VM boxes at each site, that use the shared storage, and will act as > fail-over for each other. In theory, only 1 server room would ever be > active at a time, although we may end up migrating VMs between the two > sites > for maintenance purposes. > > We've got the storage server side of things figured out (5U rackmounts with > 24 drive bauys, using FreeBSD 7.x and ZFS). We've got the storage switches > picked out (HP Procurve 2800 or 2900, depending on if we go with 1 GbE or > 10 > GbE fibre links between them). We're stuck on the storage aggregator. > > For a single aggregator box setup, we'd use FreeBSD 7.x with ZFS. The > storage servers would each export a single zvol using iSCSI. The storage > aggregator would use ZFS to create a pool using a mirrored vdev. To expand > the pool, we put in two more storage servers, and add another mirrored vdev > to the pool. No biggie. The storage aggregator then uses NFS and/or iSCSI > to make storage available to the VM boxes. This is the easy part. > > However, we'd like to remove the single-point-of-failure that the storage > aggregator represents, and have a duplicate of it running at Server Room 1. > Right now, we can do this using cold-spares that rsync from the live box > every X hours/days. We'd like this to be a live, fail-over spare, though. > And this is where we're stuck. > > What can we use to do this? CARP? Heatbeat? ggate? Should we look at > Linux with DRBD or linux-ha or cluster-nfs or similar? Perhaps RedHat > Cluster Suite? (We'd prefer not to, as then storage management becomes a > nightmare again, requiring mdadm, lvm, and more.) Would a cluster > filessytem be needed? AFS or similar? > > We have next to no knowledge of fail-over clustering when it comes to > high-availability and fail-over. Any pointers to things to read online, or > tips, or even "don't do that, you're insane" comments greatly appreciated. > :) > > Thanks. > -- > Freddie Cash > [email protected] > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:16:23 -0600 > From: Elliot Finley <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Fail-over SAN setup: ZFS, NFS, and ...? > To: Freddie Cash <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > Why not take a look at gluster? > > Freddie Cash wrote: > > [Not exactly sure which ML this belongs on, as it's related to both > > clustering and filesystems. If there's a better spot, let me know and > I'll > > update the CC:/reply-to.] > > > > We're in the planning stages for building a multi-site, fail-over SAN > setup > > which will be used to provide redundant storage for a virtual machine > setup. > > The setup will be like so: > > [Server Room 1] . [Server Room 2] > > ----------------- . ------------------- > > . > > [storage server] . [storage server] > > | . | > > | . | > > [storage switch] . [storage switch] > > \----fibre----/ | > > . | > > . | > > . [storage aggregator] > > . | > > . | > > . /---[switch]---\ > > . | | | > > . | [VM box] | > > . | | | > > . [VM box] | | > > . | | [VM box] > > . | | | > > . [network switch] > > . | > > . | > > . [internet] > > > > Server room 1 and server room 2 are on opposite ends of town (about 3 km) > > with a dedicated, direct-link, fibre link between them. There will be a > set > > of VM boxes at each site, that use the shared storage, and will act as > > fail-over for each other. In theory, only 1 server room would ever be > > active at a time, although we may end up migrating VMs between the two > sites > > for maintenance purposes. > > > > We've got the storage server side of things figured out (5U rackmounts > with > > 24 drive bauys, using FreeBSD 7.x and ZFS). We've got the storage > switches > > picked out (HP Procurve 2800 or 2900, depending on if we go with 1 GbE or > 10 > > GbE fibre links between them). We're stuck on the storage aggregator. > > > > For a single aggregator box setup, we'd use FreeBSD 7.x with ZFS. The > > storage servers would each export a single zvol using iSCSI. The storage > > aggregator would use ZFS to create a pool using a mirrored vdev. To > expand > > the pool, we put in two more storage servers, and add another mirrored > vdev > > to the pool. No biggie. The storage aggregator then uses NFS and/or > iSCSI > > to make storage available to the VM boxes. This is the easy part. > > > > However, we'd like to remove the single-point-of-failure that the storage > > aggregator represents, and have a duplicate of it running at Server Room > 1. > > Right now, we can do this using cold-spares that rsync from the live box > > every X hours/days. We'd like this to be a live, fail-over spare, > though. > > And this is where we're stuck. > > > > What can we use to do this? CARP? Heatbeat? ggate? Should we look at > > Linux with DRBD or linux-ha or cluster-nfs or similar? Perhaps RedHat > > Cluster Suite? (We'd prefer not to, as then storage management becomes a > > nightmare again, requiring mdadm, lvm, and more.) Would a cluster > > filessytem be needed? AFS or similar? > > > > We have next to no knowledge of fail-over clustering when it comes to > > high-availability and fail-over. Any pointers to things to read online, > or > > tips, or even "don't do that, you're insane" comments greatly > appreciated. > > :) > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-cluster > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]" > > > End of freebsd-cluster Digest, Vol 124, Issue 1 > *********************************************** > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-cluster To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"