Hi, I had already picked Gluster based on the requirements it meets, that of not especially high disk i/o but fast recovery with as little dataloss as possible and real time replication to a second site.
On 4 November 2015 at 12:16, Lindsay Mathieson <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 4 November 2015 at 08:39, Thing <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks but, your solution doesnt protect for a single PC hardware failure >> like a PSU blowing ie giving me real time replication to the 2nd site so I >> can be back up in minutes. >> > > ZFS can be configured to replicate every few minutes - whether that is > sufficient is dependant on your uptime and data loss requirements. > > If you *must* have realtime redundancy then yes something like gluster or > ceph is your only option. Gluster is easier to setup and maintain then > ceph. Both of them are a lot more reliable if you have three nodes, two > nodes is asking for trouble - split brain etc. > > If you want some throughput estimates then we need more spec's: > > - RAM > - CPU > - Hard Disks > - Network > - Overall Config > * Caching > * Bonding > * etc > > - With a std 1GB ethernet, your writes will max out at around 110 MB/s > - Same for Reads, unless your VM Host is also your gluster node, in which > case your reads will be a bit slower than your underlying file system > access times > > > -- > Lindsay >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
