While humming that old rock song Yackety Yacc - Dont Awk Back
Oliver Fromme on Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 11:14 sang or SED something
like this:
> Attila Nagy wrote:
> > Oliver Fromme wrote:
> > > We use NetApp Filer clusters (NAS) for that purpose.
> > > They aren't cheap, but they work very well.
>
Attila Nagy wrote:
> Oliver Fromme wrote:
> > We use NetApp Filer clusters (NAS) for that purpose.
> > They aren't cheap, but they work very well.
>
> I don't like blackboxes with nice GUIs. :)
But they do exactly what you need. I doubt that you can
build the same functionality with Linux.
On Aug 15, 2006, at 12:37 PM, Brian Candler wrote:
I think Solaris also makes a reliable NFS platform, and it even
supports failover and replication for read-only mounts. For read/
write replicated filesystems, you're probably looking at AFS (Andrew
File System, but an opensource version is at w
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:20:47AM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2006, at 5:30 AM, Phil Regnauld wrote:
> >Brian Candler (B.Candler) writes:
> >>So to make an update, you would have to unmount from box 2,
> >>remount RW on
> >>box 1, make the change, remount RO on box 1, and mount RO ag
On Aug 15, 2006, at 5:30 AM, Phil Regnauld wrote:
Brian Candler (B.Candler) writes:
So to make an update, you would have to unmount from box 2,
remount RW on
box 1, make the change, remount RO on box 1, and mount RO again on
box 2.
To make it short: if you want a reliable NFS head,
On 08/15/06 16:47, Brian Candler wrote:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 02:44:52PM +0200, Attila Nagy wrote:
I can solve this problem with Linux
How?
With a shared filesystem of course.
Specifically, which one? If there is a good filesystem for this application
perhaps it could be ported.
Any of them
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 02:44:52PM +0200, Attila Nagy wrote:
> >>I can solve this problem with Linux
> >How?
> With a shared filesystem of course.
Specifically, which one? If there is a good filesystem for this application
perhaps it could be ported.
___
On 08/15/06 14:25, Brian Candler wrote:
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:43:28PM +0200, Attila Nagy wrote:
We use NetApp Filer clusters (NAS) for that purpose.
They aren't cheap, but they work very well.
I don't like blackboxes with nice GUIs. :)
They have a command-line interface too :) Seriously,
Brian Candler (B.Candler) writes:
>
> So to make an update, you would have to unmount from box 2, remount RW on
> box 1, make the change, remount RO on box 1, and mount RO again on box 2.
To make it short: if you want a reliable NFS head, you need NetApp.
If you want to make failo
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:43:28PM +0200, Attila Nagy wrote:
> >We use NetApp Filer clusters (NAS) for that purpose.
> >They aren't cheap, but they work very well.
> I don't like blackboxes with nice GUIs. :)
They have a command-line interface too :) Seriously, these are really
excellent devices.
On 2006. 08. 14. 20:43, Attila Nagy wrote:
that a little bit hackish. I can solve this problem with Linux, but I
would like to do it with FreeBSD, that's why I'm asking. Maybe somebody
has a clever idea, which can make it possible on FreeBSD, without the
above hassles.
BTW, is there a feature,
On 2006. 08. 14. 17:55, Oliver Fromme wrote:
We use NetApp Filer clusters (NAS) for that purpose.
They aren't cheap, but they work very well.
I don't like blackboxes with nice GUIs. :)
NFS file handles are based on the inode number. That means
if you want to have a fail-over that's transparen
Attila Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to run diskless clients (they are actually servers) from
> FreeBSD, but I don't like having a SPoF at the NFS server level and
> don't want to use expensive out of the box solutions, like a NAS with a
> SAN behind it.
We use NetApp Filer
13 matches
Mail list logo
