From nobody Wed Feb 07 14:12:21 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TVMWn5hpLz59S4K for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 14:12:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from shuriku@shurik.kiev.ua) Received: from mail.flex-it.com.ua (mail.flex-it.com.ua [193.239.74.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TVMWm4Z9Zz47X1 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 14:12:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from shuriku@shurik.kiev.ua) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of shuriku@shurik.kiev.ua designates 193.239.74.7 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shuriku@shurik.kiev.ua Received: from [188.231.181.61] (helo=[10.2.1.104]) by mail.flex-it.com.ua with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.97.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1rXif5-000000008sO-3VSq for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Wed, 07 Feb 2024 16:12:27 +0200 Message-ID: <761c8030-5de9-4114-9313-22ec860fb257@shurik.kiev.ua> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 16:12:21 +0200 List-Id: Filesystems List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-fs List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: ZFS on a shared iSCSI Content-Language: uk-UA, en-US To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: From: Oleksandr Kryvulia In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ACL-Warn: SPF failed. 188.231.181.61 is not allowed to send mail from shurik.kiev.ua. X-Spamd-Bar: - X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.74 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.55)[0.549]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; XM_UA_NO_VERSION(0.01)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; ASN(0.00)[asn:35297, ipnet:193.239.72.0/22, country:UA]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-fs@freebsd.org]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[shurik.kiev.ua]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4TVMWm4Z9Zz47X1 07.02.24 14:24, Julien Cigar: > On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 11:55:54AM +0100, Andrea Brancatelli wrote: >> Hello guys, I'm not 100% this is the correct list to ask this question, if >> not please feel free to point me in the right direction. >> >> I was wondering what could be the best recipe to have an HA cluster sharing >> an external ZFS storage. >> >> Let's say I have two servers running a bunch of Jails and, thus, I'd like >> to use ZFS as the underlying storage layer and I have an external (iSCSI) >> storage connected. >> >> Would it be "easily possible" to have some (2?) iSCSI LUN exposed to both >> servers and then activate the pool on one or the other server? >> >> The idea would be to reactivate the filesystem from server A on server B if >> the server A fails. >> >> Would it be "easier" to replicate everything and zfs send datas back and >> forth? Clearly that would mean doubling datas and havin a scheduled replica >> with a possible delay in data replication, so I'd like to avoid this. >> >> Any thoughts? > I asked something similar a few years ago, the whole thread may be an interesting > read: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2016-June/023456.html > > Just to say that I tried a lot of different things, and came up to the > conclusion that for critical production usage all those things are > fragile and with hidden dragons everywhere. > > I love FreeBSD (I use it exclusively everywhere, also at work), but > there aren't any supported open-source solution for something like an > "highly available ZFS cluster". On the commercial side there is RSF-1 > and beasts like Pure storage ($$$) but ... > > I would really like to see CEPH ported to FreeBSD, that would be > extremely useful What about www/minio? Does anyone have any experience of production use? We have a lot of bhyve vm's backened by local zfs storage, but I am interesting in some kind of hyperconverged solution.