|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > drbd-user archives|
> On 10-05-26 01:36 PM, Oliver Hoffmann wrote:
> > Hi list!
> > I searched the web but I only found lvm on drbd and many problems
> > concerning kvm or xen. I need lvm and drbd to have a flexible
> > file server (without xen or the like).
> > If I put lvm on top of drbd I run into problems. Such as a complex
> > failover situation and I am limited to the physical space of a HD or
> > partitions.
> > Thus I think drbd on lvm would be better. In the end I want a
> > drbd- and pacemaker- based file server with nfs and cifs and iSCSI.
> > Plus I want to add one or more HD easily whenever needed or provide
> > more or less disk space for a client or a share.
> > What do you think?
> > Thanks for suggestions!
> > Cheers,
> > Oliver
> I actually do LVM -> DRBD -> LVM -> GFS2. Works well for me. I've
> written up a HowTo on the way I implement it. It's another one with a
> focus on the clustering side of things, but you should be able to
> skip the majority of that. The relevant section is:
> Best of luck!
Thanx a lot! I'll rather do LVM -> DRBD -> ext4 though for I don't need
nested LVM and GFS has a bad performance. At least my tests revealed
drbd-user mailing list