[Pvfs2-users] Question about redundancy

[Steve]

Is built in redundancy planned ? Or not in the scope of the project ?

Steve

Trusting my 1.1Tb to the reliability of my drives, and touch wood in 20
years of computing had never had a drive fail. Now ive just put a curse on
them!
 
-------Original Message------- 
 
From: Robert Latham 
Date: 24/04/2007 14:14:13 
To: Erich Weiler 
Cc: pvfs2-users at beowulf-underground.org 
Subject: Re: [Pvfs2-users] Question about redundancy 
 
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 05:03:39PM -0700, Erich Weiler wrote: 
> I need to be clear on this before putting a lot of time into it, but it 
> sounds like this might be a good solution for our firm, as we have a 200 
> node cluster each with one 500GB disk, 400GB of which can be leveraged 
> to a massive parallel file system (400GB x 200 nodes = one big ~80TB 
> distributed file system). But that assumes that there is no redundancy, 
> other wise that 80TB would be more like 50-60TB max or something because 
> there would be some redundancy in there... ? 
 
Murali's explanation is spot-on: no software-based reduncancy scheme. 
 
For users concerned with redundancy, we suggest hardware failover to 
Shared storage, which works quite well. 
 
==rob 
 
-- 
Rob Latham 
Mathematics and Computer Science Division A215 0178 EA2D B059 8CDF 
Argonne National Lab, IL USA B29D F333 664A 4280 315B 
_______________________________________________ 
Pvfs2-users mailing list 
Pvfs2-users at beowulf-underground.org 
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-users