[9178] in linux-scsi channel archive
Re: [1] aha-2940 [2] hw config question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Scott Marlowe)
Wed Jul 12 18:37:58 2000
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 15:40:00 -0600 (MDT)
From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@ihs.com>
To: technews@egsx.com
cc: linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10007121652220.11653-100000@egsx.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10007121537010.7028-100000@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 12 Jul 2000 technews@egsx.com wrote:
> Thanks to all for your help!
>
> I will not connect the machines in that way, data integrity
> is the most important issue we consider. The SCSI device
> that is intended to be shared holds over 100G data and will
> grow to 300Gb by the end of the year, and the
> last thing I want to happen is for it to be corrupted.
>
> Do you know of any external hardware that allows you to
> connect multiple servers to a scsi device??
If you don't need 160 Megabyte performance (i.e. 10 Megs a second will do)
then you can always build a little Pentium 166 with a 100BaseTX card, or
even a pair, to share out the data.
If you need high performance (i.e. fibre channel hard drives etc...) then
look at the global file system (www.globalfilesystem.org) which lets your
computers, in a non-homogenous environment, share one or more drives much
the way you are considering, and I think even works with shared SCSI instead
of just fibre channel...
but if data integrity is most important, than a small box with all the
drives in it sharing via Samba or NFS is the best solution, especially if
you don't need radical speed out of it.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
