On 01/13/2016 02:21 AM, Pawan Devaiah wrote:
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.
What will be the kind of volume you will be using with these disks?
Pranith
Thanks
Dev
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 9:46 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri
<[email protected] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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 list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
