There's no significant change with the global EC clusters story in the 2.7
release. That's something we're discussing next week at the summit.
--John
On 19 Apr 2016, at 22:47, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Has the release of 2.7 significantly changed the assessment here?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mark
Hi,
Has the release of 2.7 significantly changed the assessment here?
Thanks
Mark
On 15/02/16 23:29, Kota TSUYUZAKI wrote:
Hello Mark,
AFAIK, a few reasons for that we still are in working progress for erasure code
+ geo replication.
and expect to survive a region outage...
With that I
On 16/02/16 17:10, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
On 15/02/16 23:29, Kota TSUYUZAKI wrote:
Hello Mark,
AFAIK, a few reasons for that we still are in working progress for
erasure code + geo replication.
and expect to survive a region outage...
With that I mind I did some experiments (Liberty swift)
On 15/02/16 23:29, Kota TSUYUZAKI wrote:
Hello Mark,
AFAIK, a few reasons for that we still are in working progress for erasure code
+ geo replication.
and expect to survive a region outage...
With that I mind I did some experiments (Liberty swift) and it looks to me like
if you have:
-
Hello Mark,
AFAIK, a few reasons for that we still are in working progress for erasure code
+ geo replication.
>> and expect to survive a region outage...
>>
>> With that I mind I did some experiments (Liberty swift) and it looks to me
>> like if you have:
>>
>> - num_data_frags < num_nodes in
After looking at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YHvYkcse-k
I have a question (that follows on from Bruno's) about using erasure
coding with geo replication.
Now the example given to show why you could/should not use erasure
coding with geo replication is somewhat flawed as it is
