Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
I'm not sure what danswartz is proposing versus the solution I outlined. But if we're talking about the solution described at my Github, there is no impact to a running VM during controller node failover.
See:
I'm not worried about throughput. The performance profile of a clustered node in my setup is the same as a single node.
What I DO have in some setups is a dual active/passive where I pin a zpool to each node. Say I have two zpools housed in different JBOD enclosures. Node1 serves pool1. Node2...
I have quite a bit of experience with this; hence the post sharing my approach.
Linux and ZFS isn't a problem, so I'm not sure what you're asserting.
Napp-it is a fine product, and I'm certain many are happy with their FreeBSD installations. I'm focused on Linux, though.
No, I explicitly do NOT want Solaris-variants or FreeBSD for this application. This is mainly for hardware support and monitoring reasons.
I base most systems on HP ProLiant hardware, and make use of the monitoring tools and add-ons available for supported operating systems. These are definitely...
Sure. I have setups like this with multiple enclosures as well. Cabling setup is a factor, but performance is really dependent upon pool design and your disk/controller situation. E.g. you can fill a JBOD with SAS SSDs or 10k disks or 7.2 SAS drives...
Performance is fine, though. Think of it...
I thought I'd share this here since I've used bits and pieces of advice from the forum in the past.
I was frustrated with the limitations and cost implications of using commercial ZFS solutions in a high-availability setup. NexentaStor, QuantaStor and Zetavault either had cost or support...
My clients have purchased licensed Zetavault under my direction. Single-node installations have installed and gone fine without incident. This proof-of-concept was initiated by you because you wanted to show us the new HA functionality in Zetavault. We were excited by the prospect.
I wouldn't...
Okay, I'll bite...
I gave a fair assessment of your product offering in this post. I was not disappointed with Zetavault performance, support or pricing.
The breakdown came in communication... They didn't wish to engage over telephone, so my questions about the product played out in long email...
I can add to this...
The Zetavault implementation of regular ZFS on a single node is similar to QuantaStor.
Ubuntu+ZFS with a basic GUI to manage all aspects of the system.
In that mode, it's very affordable.
When Zetavault reworked its HA solution, I was intrigued because it differs...
Weird question... Is Nexenta just over? I mean, I've been a longtime user/proponent, but I think I may need to move to another platform for my storage arrays. I'm concerned that the company is unhealthy. I've deployed ~25 Nexenta-based ZFS solutions to clients over the years, and they've been...