[Lustre-discuss] lustre failover pairs

[Kevin Van Maren]

It is normal for an OSS server pair to serve OSTs from both servers.  So 
in that sense, it relates back to the GPFS NSD servers.

The difference versus GPFS (where LUNs are active on both servers all 
the time, even though one is the primary server) is that the secondary 
server does NOT serve the OSTs being served by the primary, unless the 
primary is down and the OST has been failed over.

Kevin


John White wrote:
> Good Morning Folks,
> 	A quick question on lustre failover as far as OSSs are concerned.   
> Can failover pairs be in an (for lack of a better phrase) active- 
> active setup?  I have a GPFS background where we would have NSDs  
> (OSTs) split between two servers -- half the NSDs would be primarily  
> served by one server, the other half on the other server.  In the case  
> of a failover, one server would take over all NSDs until such time as  
> the primary was back in production.
>
> Looking at the lustre docs, it looks like this is not the standard  
> operating procedure.  Rather, it looks like a "active-passive" setup  
> where one OSS owns all the OSTs and the failover is more a warm spare  
> ready to kick into action when a failure occurs but not serving any  
> data requests while in full production.  Is this a correct analysis of  
> the lustre side of things?
> ----------------
> John White
> HPC Systems Engineer
> (510) 486-7307
> One Cyclotron Rd, MS: 50B-3209C
> Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
> Berkeley, CA 94720
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>