Oh, well, in that case, I'd just take it down (marked DISABLED).
Sam
On 15 March 2011 12:03, Santanu Das <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Yes, that's the thing I'm worrying about; it shouldn't take more than 30
> mins to come back online.
>
> -Santanu
>
>
> On 15/03/2011 11:58, Alessandra Forti wrote:
>>
>> It might take days to drain a data server. Depending on the length of the
>> maintainance intervention I wouldn't suggest to drain. You can leave with
>> unavailable data if you put the site in downtime to alert shifters that
>> there might be problems.
>>
>> cheers
>> alessandra
>>
>> On 15/03/2011 11:49, Santanu Das wrote:
>>>
>>> What actually happens we drain the pool node?
>>>
>>> -Santanu
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15/03/2011 11:39, Sam Skipsey wrote:
>>>>
>>>> What do you mean by "without disturbing the entire storage system"?
>>>> Marking the filesystems on it disabled and then turning it off will
>>>> work - but obviously, the files present on it will be inaccessible.
>>>> You'd have to drain it to avoid that, though ;)
>>>>
>>>> Sam
>>>>
>>>> On 15 March 2011 11:35, Santanu Das<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Greetings experts,
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the best why to take individual disk-server down (for
>>>>> maintenance
>>>>> etc.) without disturbing the entire storage system? Any suggestion(s)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Santanu
>>>>>
>>
>
|