[Beowulf] Lustre failover
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Bernd Schubert bernd.schubert at fastmail.fmWed Sep 10 05:37:12 PDT 2008
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Lustre failover
- Next message: [Beowulf] Lustre failover
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wednesday 10 September 2008 13:41:18 andrew holway wrote: > >From the Lustre manual:- > > With OST servers it is possible to have a load-balanced active/active > configuration. > Each node is the primary node for a group of OSTs, and the failover > node for other > groups. To expand the simple two-node example, we add ost2 which is primary > on nodeB, and is on the LUNs nodeB:/dev/sdc1 and nodeA:/dev/sdd1. This > demonstrates that the /dev/ identity can differ between nodes, but both > devices must map to the same physical LUN. In this type of failover > configuration, you can > mount two OSTs on two different nodes, and format them from either node. > With failover, two OSSs provide the same service to the Lustre network in > parallel. In case > of disaster or a failure in one of the nodes, the other OSS can > provide uninterrupted > filesystem services. > For an active/active configuration, mount one OST on one node and another > OST on the other node. You can format them from either node. > > Anyone done this on a production system? Yes, sure we do this all the time. > > Experiances? Comments? You should use either careful manual failover or heartbeat + stonith to prevent accidental double mounts. Usually we have a setup like this: http://www.pci.uni-heidelberg.de/tc/usr/bernd/downloads/lustre/MDS.jpg Cheers, Bernd -- Bernd Schubert Q-Leap Networks GmbH
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Lustre failover
- Next message: [Beowulf] Lustre failover
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
