On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 12:21:53PM +0200, Markus Oswald wrote: >Am Mo, den 19.04.2004 schrieb George Georgalis um 04:40: >> Hi, >> >> You might like DRBD better than AFS, I think AFS is more suited, to >> allow multiple servers to serve /usr/bin, ie static partitions. /var or >> /home partitions need something different. >> >> Coda does sound good. ...just following these, not using them yet, I >> think inter-mezzo is too young still, links: >> >> http://www.drbd.org/ >> Drbd is a block device which is designed to build high availability >> clusters. This is done by mirroring a whole block device via (a >> dedicated) network. You could see it as a network raid-1. > >As you already wrote - DRBD is a block device, not a filesystem. You >have to run a filesystem (like reiserfs oder ext3) on top of it, just as >you would have to with a "normal" block device like a SCSI RAID. > >Comparing DRBD to NFS or AFS, well, apples and oranges...
of course you have to install a fs on a block device. the question was about network filesystem operability. DRBD to NFS seems like a fair comparison to me, since they are different. How's your experience with coda, lustre or afs? // George -- George Georgalis, Architect and administrator, Linux services. IXOYE http://www.galis.org/george cell:646-331-2027 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key fingerprint = 5415 2738 61CF 6AE1 E9A7 9EF0 0186 503B 9831 1631 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
