I was first interested in the simplicity and redundancy but it seems the product needs to be more mature like Lustre. Can't wait until Lustre's SNS ;-)
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Jordan Mendler<[email protected]> wrote: >> We have been hearing a lot of news recently about "Gluster". Does >> anyone know how it compares to Lustre? Can it do the same things as >> Lustre? It seems it has built in SNS. Anyone know? > > We have tried Gluster on several occasions and it was always buggy at scale. > Initially we had about 60TB of medium sized files in a test environment with > about 20 clients, and Gluster flipped out when a node would reboot. Since > there is no Metadata server, it appeared to hang on reindexing everything on > each node on start up. Also lots of weird hangs and things like taking 5 > minutes to return an ls. No where near as stable as Lustre, which more or > less just works, with a smaller number of weird issues. > > The Gluster company also gave us a lot of mixed signals. They called us once > to offer us free support in helping up set up a reevaluation of GlusterFS. > We spoke to the CEO's and agreed. After spending several hours setting it up > ourselves, they then avoided our support questions saying priority goes to > paying customers. Ultimately they attempted to help us, but with little > success. > > They present a nice roadmap and the concept of minimizing complexity is > promising for things like backup systems. Unfortunately they are nowhere > near ready. Hopefully they can stabilize their product in the future because > it would be a good addition to the open-source community. > > Jordan > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > > _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
