Re: [Xen-users] SAN / LVM backend and partitions

["Reinhard Brandstaedter" <Reinhard.Brandstaedter@xxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 23:09 +0800, Tim Post wrote:
> The scenario Chris described happened to me (unfortunately) a few
times
> until I really began simplifying things. The NFS / Open SSI classic
way
> of doing things does apply here, and a many-read-no-write volume
> shouldn't be too risky. 
> 
> Don't use a cluster FS for something you could pull off with NFS, no
> matter how much easy it may seem to make your 'down the road' ideas
work
> better. If you need a cluster FS, I highly recommend going with ocfs2
vs
> the RH cluster suite.
> 
> It almost always every time blows up in your face somehow, and I'm
still
> hearing nasty things about a GFS inode DOS vulnerability. I'm not
saying
> that still exists, I'm just pointing out some would rather risk it
than
> try upgrading GFS. :)

Unfortunately RedHat EL5 (which we use) doesn't include support for
OCFS2, I think. So we are just testing GFS2 too.

But I thought I can setup this without any cluster FS at all. Of course
a Clustered LVM comes in very handy.
For the NFS argument I only see the problem that a NFS server would be a
single point of failure which I want to avoid (especially because I have
SAN storage)
As it's recommended to use LVM devices for DomU disks I don't see why I
should "risk" using a cluster FS at all.
CLVM would be the easy way to avoid manual LVM management on the Dom0s
but it's the only thing I would need from the Cluster Suite.

What do you suggest for the storage of DomUs then? File backend on a
cluster FS or LVM backend with maybe CLVM?

Regards,
Reinhard


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users