Thanks for the response Pranith If we take EC out of the equation and say I go with RAID on the physical disk, do you think GlusterFS is good for the 2 workloads that I mentioned before.
Basically it is going to be a NFS storage for VM and data but with different RAIDs, 10 for VM and 6 for data. Thanks Dev On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 9:46 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri < [email protected]> wrote: > > > On 01/12/2016 01:26 PM, Pawan Devaiah wrote: > > Thanks for your response Pranith and Mathieu, > > Pranith: To answer your question, I am planning to use this storage for > two main workloads. > > 1. As a shared storage for VMs. > > EC as it is today is not good for this. > > 2. As a NFS Storage for files. > > If the above is for storing archive data. EC is nice here. > > Pranith > > > We are a online backup company so we store few hundred Terra bytes of data. > > > Mathieu: I appreciate your concern, however as a system admins sometimes > we get paranoid and try to control everything under the Sun. > I know I can only control what I can. > > Having said that, No, I have pair of servers to start with so at the > moment I am just evaluating and preparing for proof of concept, after which > I am going to propose to my management, if they are happy then we will > proceed further. > > Regards, > Dev > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Mathieu Chateau <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> For any system, 36 disks raise disk failure probability. Do you plan >> GlusterFS with only one server? >> >> You should think about failure at each level and be prepared for it: >> >> - Motherboard failure (full server down) >> - Disks failure >> - Network cable failure >> - File system corruption (time needed for fsck) >> - File/folder removed by mistake (backup) >> >> Using or not raid depend on your answer on these questions and >> performance needed. >> It also depend how "good" is raid controller in your server, like if it >> has battery and 1GB of cache. >> >> When many disks are bought at same time (1 order, serial number close to >> each other), they may fail in near time to each other (if something bad >> happened in manufactory). >> I already saw like 3 disks failing in few days. >> >> just my 2 cents, >> >> >> >> Cordialement, >> Mathieu CHATEAU >> http://www.lotp.fr >> >> 2016-01-12 4:36 GMT+01:00 Pranith Kumar Karampuri <[email protected]>: >> >>> >>> >>> On 01/12/2016 04:34 AM, Pawan Devaiah wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> We have a fairly powerful server sitting at office with 128 Gig RAM and >>> 36 X 4 TB drives. I am planning to utilize this server as a backend storage >>> with GlusterFS on it. >>> I have been doing lot of reading on Glusterfs, but I do not see any >>> definite recommendation on having RAID on GLUSTER nodes. >>> Is it recommended to have RAID on GLUSTER nodes specially for the bricks? >>> If Yes, is it not contrary to the latest Erasure code implemented in >>> Gluster or is it still not ready for production environment? >>> I am happy to implement RAID but my two main concern are >>> 1. I want to make most of the disk space available. >>> 2. I am also concerned about the rebuild time after disk failure on the >>> RAID. >>> >>> What is the workload you have? >>> >>> We found in our testing that random read/write workload with Erasure >>> coded volumes is not as good as we get with replication. There are >>> enhancements in progress at the moment to address these things which we are >>> yet to merge and re-test. >>> >>> Pranith >>> >>> >>> Thanks >>> Dev >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gluster-users mailing >>> [email protected]http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gluster-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>> >> >> > >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
