On Monday 26 September 2005 10:11, Owen Williams wrote:
>>> A colleague and I are thinking of getting two large RAID arrays
>>> keeping one in his machine room and one in mine in different
>>> buildings.  Then split them in two with DRDB running in pairs on the
>>> four partitions.
>>
>> Unless you have 100Bt or better between your machine rooms, you may
>> find that this is quite slow. I'd do some replication benchmarks
>> before doing a full implementation. ;)
>
>I'm just hoping the DRDB solution finishes before the rsync one would.
>The rysnc might bite into core network hours because it starts after
>amanda has finished.
>
>In someways after its setup the DRDB solution will be cleaner than rsync
>because we'll only be dealing with Amanda.  Rysnc would need some sort
> of wrapper to handle errors.
>
>I'm going to do some tesing though. :)
>
>Owen.

One could always launch the rsync process at a high priority (low
service needs that way) and just let it stick a word in edgeways the
rest of the day.  Amanda is done, so its src images will be stable
until the next amanda run, and your raid might have other things to
do also.  If it takes several hours to make the rsync image, who
cares?

I run setiathome and einstein@home here, both at a launching priority
of 19, so they share about 98% of the cpu here, but at that priority,
I'm *never* aware that they are running & sometimes I'll do a ps
-ae|grep (seti/boinc) just to make sure they're running.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.