On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta < [email protected]> wrote:
> 2017-04-30 10:13 GMT+02:00 <[email protected]>: > > I was (I believe) the first one to run into the bug, it happens and I > knew it > > was a risk when installing gluster. > > I know. > > > But since then I didn't see any warnings anywhere except here, I agree > > with you that it should be mentionned in big bold letters on the site. > > > > Might even be worth adding a warning directly on the cli when trying to > > add bricks if sharding is enabled, to make sure no-one will destroy a > > whole cluster for a known bug. > > Exactly. This is making me angry. > > Even $BigVendor usually release a security bulletin, in example: > https://support.citrix.com/article/CTX214305 > https://support.citrix.com/article/CTX214768 > > Immediatly after discovering that bug, a report was made available (on > official website, not on a mailinglist) > telling users which operations should be avoided until a fix is made. > > Gluster don't. There is a huge bug that isn't referenced in official docs. > > Is not acting like a customer, i'm just asking for some transparancy. > > Even if this is an open source project, nobody should play with user data. > This bug (or, better, these bugs) are know from time, an there is NO WORDS > in any official docs nor the web site. > > is not a rare bug, it *always* loose data when used with VMs and > sharding during a rebalance. > this feature should be disabled or users should be warned somewhere on > web site and not forcing > all of them to look through ML archives. > > Anyway, i've just asked for a feature like simplifying the add-brick > process. Gluster devs are free to ignore it > but if they are interest in something similiar, i'm willing to provide > more info (if I can, i'm not a developer) > > I really love gluster, lack of metadata server is awesome, files > stored "verbatim" with no alteration is amazing (almost all SDS alter > file when stored on disks) > but being forced to add bricks in a multiple of replica count is > making gluster very expesive (yes, there is a workaround with multiple > steps, but this is prone to > error, thus i'm asking to simplify this phase allowing users to add a > single brick to a replica X volume with automatic member replacement > and rebalance) > IMHO It is difficult to implement what you are asking for without metadata server which stores where each replica is stored. > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > -- Pranith
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
