Not having run it for a long time I don't feel we can make a great
long-term judgement.
We are looking at this solution for reasons of reliability. The feeling
is while our lustre filesystems provide the best performance and used
for scratch space on a cluster they are a little unstable (or untrusted)
to be used for longer term data storage. Using gluster without striping
leaves a very simple backend system with normal files - aiding in the
case filesystem recovery is needed.
During our testing and working through various problems we have greatly
abused the gluster install in general, and the data has remained fine
throughout. So that part of it looks good.
The people here working on the kernel specific issues are still in the
process, when they're done any findings will get posted to the list.
Long term, I'm still concerned about the lack of documentation.
Scott
On 8/4/11 8:51 AM, Uwe Kastens wrote:
Scott,
That sound interesting.
It hasn't been going well so far. Currently we are struggling with
performance problems that seem to be linked to certain versions of
the linux kernel.
The lack of in depth and current documentation is one of the most
glaring and obvious problems.
What is your feeling about stability of the solution?
Kind Regards
Uwe
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
