|
The original author set up his mail spools on a local harddrive instead
of some shared filesystem, such as with NFS. Obviously that can't work.
The possible solutions of AFS and coda and GFS were mentioned before
Graeme sang the praises of NetApp. I too am here to sing those praises.
I second everything Graeme said about the NetApp. They just don't
crash.
netapp2> uptime
1:58pm up 686 days, 3:14 200353234224 NFS ops, 0 CIFS ops, 3318 HTTP
ops, 0 DAFS ops, 0 FCP ops, 0 iSCSI ops
I've used only two models, an older F740 and currently a FAS270c.
Joseph Mack NA3T wanted us to know:
>>My day job sees me working for an ISP; we have a number of mail systems
>>where we use multiple frontend servers (some behind LVS, some using
>>other methods) with NetApp Filer backends offering mail storage over NFS
>Whenever I've had NFS mounts and machines crash, I wind up
>with stale file handles, which I can only fix by rebooting
>both the server and the client. Assuming that machines crash
>occassionally, what sort of hygiene do you exercise to not
>wind up with stale file handles, or if you do get them, what
>do you do about it?
We do get occassional complaints in client logs, but they're pretty
solid overall. Our client base ranges from RedHat 7.3 to Gentoo to
CentOS.
>You say your setup is realiable, so maybe you don't have to
>deal with the problem, but would your setup survive pulling
>a few power cables, waiting 30mins and plugging them back
>in?
Yes, the NetApp equipment would.
Yes, the clients doing mail apps would.
No, the clients running apache would not (apache would consume all
memory and kill the machine).
Finally, no, my status as a current employee would not survive. :-)
--
Regards... Todd
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. --Ed Howdershelt
Linux kernel 2.6.12-12mdksmp 2 users, load average: 0.09, 0.09, 0.01
|
