This si kind of what we have...
"Is the environment use windows DFS or anything? FRS was crap, but DFS-R
(R2) might provide adherence to bandwidth limits on site-based
replication. I'm looking at giving iscsi targets to windows off a local
san (OF), and giving DFS-R a try to manage replications and such, just
not sure how it stretches yet. Not positive, but worth a look if DFS is
front-ending a windows server/client environment for your needs,
supposedly it has wan-friendly qualities for such occasion. Doesn't
solve all issues, but may in some cases."
and it performs really well except when i do large data xfers from
machine 1 and machine 2 with main data volumes as iSCSI on the same OF
server.
but that one is kind of expected.
we are really having to go back to DFS/FRS i was just trying to
explore options but for only2-3 more months of this its at this point
just better to fix DFS again.
however i still like OF as a filer.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Michael Butash<
michael@butash.net> wrote:
> Consider also Qos on the routers at very least, segregate your traffic
> via CBWFQ (Cisco) or whatever vendor solution supports queuing. You
> don't want disk sync's to swat other important traffic.
>
> Is the environment use windows DFS or anything? FRS was crap, but DFS-R
> (R2) might provide adherence to bandwidth limits on site-based
> replication. I'm looking at giving iscsi targets to windows off a local
> san (OF), and giving DFS-R a try to manage replications and such, just
> not sure how it stretches yet. Not positive, but worth a look if DFS is
> front-ending a windows server/client environment for your needs,
> supposedly it has wan-friendly qualities for such occasion. Doesn't
> solve all issues, but may in some cases.
>
> -mb
>
>
> On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 14:06 -0700, Stephen wrote:
>> We are useing an openfiler server here and it has been running great.
>>
>> right now it is hosting several iSCSI connections to our servers
>> however we need to replicate data on one of the iSCSI volumes between
>> 2 sites.
>>
>> internally using DRBD/heartbeat comes to mind as a new but no brainer
>> solution. however these servers need to live in 2 different states
>> (and eventually maybe 3-4 locations)
>>
>> generally it would seem that rsync would be better however it is a
>> file level replication and seems that it would not be able to
>> replicate the iSCSI volume which is block level...
>>
>> can DRBD/heartbeat sync across a t-1 or pair of bonded t-1's? or will
>> it eat the pipe?
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
--
A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.
Stephen
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)