LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Virtualization and Cloud
User Name
Password
Linux - Virtualization and Cloud This forum is for the discussion of all topics relating to Linux Virtualization and Linux Cloud platforms. Xen, KVM, OpenVZ, VirtualBox, VMware, Linux-VServer and all other Linux Virtualization platforms are welcome. OpenStack, CloudStack, ownCloud, Cloud Foundry, Eucalyptus, Nimbus, OpenNebula and all other Linux Cloud platforms are welcome. Note that questions relating solely to non-Linux OS's should be asked in the General forum.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 04-28-2011, 09:47 AM   #1
bweaver
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2010
Posts: 44

Rep: Reputation: 0
Which is better XEN SAN strategy--Clustered File System (OCFS2/GFS) or use of CLVM?


Hello all, we are trying to set up a XEN-enabled virtualized failover cluster that will access a SAN. We will likely run Xen 4.0 on Debian Squeeze.

We are trying to figure out whether to go with a clustered file system such as OCFS2 or GFS, or else a 'sliced' SAN in combination with a CLVM.

Questions:
1. Does cluster+CLVM-based failover work better than OCFS2? I had heard there were 'fencing' problems with OCFS2, creating frequent 'dropouts' of (ostensibly) failed nodes. But I don't know how well CLVM-based systems manage failover.

2. Does use of OCFS2 require, effectively, TWO heartbeat systems? One to manage failover of processes from failed node to replacement node, and one to manage failover of SAN resource and file access?


I have heard that
Advantages of OCFS2 are:
ease of installation

Advantages of CLVM are:
faster than OCFS2 (because OCFS2 copy-on-write can be slow)
removes single point of failure represented by OCFS2

Any preferences between these two solutions? Thanks very much in advance.
 
Old 05-03-2011, 12:45 PM   #2
Slax-Dude
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Location: Valadares, Portugal
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 267

Rep: Reputation: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by bweaver View Post
2. Does use of OCFS2 require, effectively, TWO heartbeat systems? One to manage failover of processes from failed node to replacement node, and one to manage failover of SAN resource and file access?
OCFS2 will manage fail-over of nodes using its own heartbeat.
All the nodes will mount the SAN resource r/w, so if one node dies, it will not affect file access for the other nodes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bweaver View Post
Advantages of CLVM are:
faster than OCFS2 (because OCFS2 copy-on-write can be slow)
removes single point of failure represented by OCFS2
What do you mean by OCFS2 single point of failure?
 
Old 05-06-2011, 09:49 AM   #3
bweaver
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2010
Posts: 44

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Thanks, slax-Dude

This helps a lot!
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Searching for Clustered File System? pjbuchan Linux - Hardware 4 02-01-2011 03:31 PM
LXer: OCFS2: Unappreciated Linux File System LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 06-30-2010 11:00 AM
Using OCFS2, A Clustering File System jeremy LQ Articles Discussion 0 05-29-2008 01:55 PM
Clustered file system advice / reco sir-lancealot Linux - Server 0 10-21-2007 10:34 PM
using lvm/ocfs2 to configure san storage mn9 Linux - Server 1 06-12-2007 04:35 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:25 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration