LFCS Storage Management Practice Question
A system administrator is setting up a high-availability cluster using shared storage. Which filesystem is best suited for this environment where multiple nodes need simultaneous read-write access to the same filesystem?
⚠ Common exam trap
Many candidates confuse a filesystem's ability to be mounted on multiple nodes (e.g., via NFS) with true cluster-aware filesystem support, or they assume that any journaling filesystem like XFS or ext4 can be used on shared storage without a distributed lock manager.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
GFS2
GFS2 (Global File System 2) is a shared-disk cluster filesystem designed for high-availability environments where multiple nodes require simultaneous read-write access to the same filesystem. It uses a distributed lock manager (DLM) to coordinate access across nodes, ensuring data consistency without requiring a single metadata server. This makes it ideal for active-active cluster configurations with shared block storage.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Btrfs
Why it's wrong here
Btrfs is a single-node copy-on-write filesystem; it lacks the distributed locking and cluster quorum mechanisms required for concurrent multi-node write access, so simultaneous mounts would corrupt metadata. It is tempting because it offers snapshots, checksums and RAID-like profiles, making it a strong choice for single-server storage pools, not shared clusters.
- ✓
GFS2
Why this is correct
GFS2 is a clustered filesystem using distributed locking through a lock manager, letting multiple nodes mount and write to the same shared device concurrently. This satisfies the simultaneous read-write access constraint, unlike single-node filesystems such as ext4 or XFS.
- ✗
XFS
Why it's wrong here
XFS is a local journaling filesystem and cannot coordinate concurrent writes from multiple nodes; without a cluster-aware locking layer, simultaneous mounts corrupt metadata. It is tempting because XFS scales well on large single-node volumes and supports online growth, making it the right pick for high-capacity local storage or exported via NFS, not shared block devices.
- ✗
ext4
Why it's wrong here
ext4 lacks the distributed locking and cluster-aware journaling needed for concurrent read-write access from multiple nodes; mounting it simultaneously on two hosts corrupts metadata. It suits single-node local storage, where its journaling and mature tooling excel. For shared block devices, a cluster filesystem such as GFS2 or OCFS2 is required instead.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This LFCS question is part of Courseiva's 406-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This LFCS practice question is part of Courseiva's free Linux Foundation certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the LFCS exam.