what network-FS for web-cluster? - Networking

This is a discussion on what network-FS for web-cluster? - Networking ; Hi, Whats the best network-FS for a Linux LVS cluster used as a web-server for a (mysql)DB application? I can use no network-FS and replicate the DB but then I have a problem with session-management and also if the DB ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: what network-FS for web-cluster?

  1. what network-FS for web-cluster?

    Hi,

    Whats the best network-FS for a Linux LVS cluster used as a web-server
    for a (mysql)DB application?
    I can use no network-FS and replicate the DB but then I have a problem
    with session-management and also if the DB gets really large I run
    into problems with that too. I think using persistent connections is
    ugly so I would like to use a network-FS to at least store session-
    data, but would better like a network-FS to store the entire DB.
    The main DB will be large and holding lots of photos, video, and text.
    Allmost all web-page requests will require DB reads, only a few will
    require writes (except for the session-management data).
    I want very high-availability by the way, 100%.

    I looked into Lustre and PVFS, but they don't seem ideal, they get
    ugly when you need failover. Not sure about NFS.

    Is there no network FS that can just sort of create a RAID? I will use
    comodity servers for the cluster. Each has a single disk, I want to
    stripe and mirror over the disks to get both redundancy as well as
    extremely high capacity. Whats the solution for this? If a server goes
    down, everything must continue as normal without any hickups!

    Thanks alot!
    Tobias


  2. Re: what network-FS for web-cluster?

    On Jul 25, 8:22 pm, nsa....@gmail.com wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > Whats the best network-FS for a Linux LVS cluster used as a web-server
    > for a (mysql)DB application?
    > I can use no network-FS and replicate the DB but then I have a problem
    > with session-management and also if the DB gets really large I run
    > into problems with that too. I think using persistent connections is
    > ugly so I would like to use a network-FS to at least store session-
    > data, but would better like a network-FS to store the entire DB.
    > The main DB will be large and holding lots of photos, video, and text.
    > Allmost all web-page requests will require DB reads, only a few will
    > require writes (except for the session-management data).
    > I want very high-availability by the way, 100%.
    >
    > I looked into Lustre and PVFS, but they don't seem ideal, they get
    > ugly when you need failover. Not sure about NFS.
    >
    > Is there no network FS that can just sort of create a RAID? I will use
    > comodity servers for the cluster. Each has a single disk, I want to
    > stripe and mirror over the disks to get both redundancy as well as
    > extremely high capacity. Whats the solution for this? If a server goes
    > down, everything must continue as normal without any hickups!
    >
    > Thanks alot!
    > Tobias


    this isn't a database question, but a clustering & file system
    question.

    You might get better responses in a comp.os.linux.* group.

    Good luck!
    Ed


+ Reply to Thread