Re: petabyte class archival filestore wanted/proposed

[Jeff Anderson-Lee]

Jeff Garzik wrote:

> Jeff Anderson-Lee wrote:
>
> > I'm part of a project at University of California Berkeley that is 
> > trying to put together a predominantly archival file system for 
> > petabyte class data stores using Linux with clusters of commodity 
> > server hardware.  We currently have multiple terabytes of hardware on 
> > top of which we intend to build such a system.  However, our hope is 
> > that the end system would be useful for a wide range of users from 
> > someone with 3 large disk or three disk servers to groups with 3 or 
> > more distributed storage sites.
> >
> > Main Goals/Features:
> >    1) Tapeless: maintain multiple copies on disk (minimize 
> > backup/restore lag)
> >    2) "Mirroring" across remote sites: for disaster recovery (we sit 
> > on top of  the Hayward Fault)
> >    3) Persistent snapshots: as archival copies instead of 
> > backup/restore scanning
> >    4) Copy-On-Write: in support of snapshots/archives
> >    5) Append-mostly log structured file system: make synchronization 
> > of remote mirrors easier (tail the log).
> >    6) Avoid (insofar as possible) single point of failure and 
> > bottlenecks (for scalability)
> >
> > I've looked into the existing file systems I know about, and none of 
> > them seem to fit the bill.
> >
> > Parts of the Open Solaris ZFS file system looks interesting, except 
> > (a) it is not on Linux and (b) seems to mix together too many levels 
> > (volume manager and file system).  I can see how using some of the 
> > concepts and implementing something like it on top of an 
> > append-mostly distributed logical device might work however.  By 
> > splitting the project into two parts ((a) a robust, distributed 
> > logical block device and (b) a flexible file system with snapshots)  
> > it might make it easier to design and build.
> >
> > Before we begin however, it is important to find out:
> >    1) Is there anything sufficiently like this to either (a) use 
> > instead, or (b) start from.
> >    2) Is there community support for insertion in the main kernel 
> > tree (without which it is just another toy project)?
> >    3) Anyone care to join in (a) design, (b) implementation, or (c) 
> > testing?
>
>
> I would recommend checking out Venti:
> http://cm.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/venti.html 

Yes, I've seen that and like some of the ideas.  There is no GPL Linux 
implementation of Venti that I know of.

Jeff Anderson-Lee

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/