Gluster users - Jan 2017 - Migration path from native Gluster-NFS towards NFS-Ganesha

Hi all,

In light of the future removal of native Gluster-NFS (and also because of a
worrying bug that causes NFS crashes, see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381970 then
http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2016-November/029333.html and
recently http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2017-January/029632.html
) I'm planning to move towards NFS-Ganesha.

I have a couple of questions for which I could not find answers on the available
docs (sorry if I missed something):

1) Is it possible (and advisable, in production too) today (3.8.x) to configure
a GlusterFS based cluster to use NFS-Ganesha (as NFS v3/v4 solution) and Samba
(as CIFS solution) both controlled by CTDB as a highly available *and* load
balanced (multiple IPs with DNS round-robin, not active/passive) storage
solution? (note: I mean *without* using a full Pacemaker+Corosync stack)

2) If the answer to the above question is "yes", is the above above
mentioned solution capable of coexisting with oVirt in an hyperconverged setup
(assuming replica 3 etc. etc.)?

Many thanks in advance to anyone who can answer the above and/or point me to any
relevant resources/docs.

Best regards,
Giuseppe

On 01/12/2017 04:36 PM, Giuseppe Ragusa wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> 1) Is it possible (and advisable, in production too) today (3.8.x) to
configure a GlusterFS based cluster to use NFS-Ganesha (as NFS v3/v4 solution)
and Samba (as CIFS solution) both controlled by CTDB as a highly available *and*
load balanced (multiple IPs with DNS round-robin, not active/passive) storage
solution? (note: I mean *without* using a full Pacemaker+Corosync stack)
It's probably doable.

The only reason it's not advisable ? IMO ? is that it's not what
we're
doing, and getting help could be pretty hard.

The Samba team has all the CTDB experience. I've poked them ? hopefully
they will respond.

Is there some reason you don't want to use Pacemaker and Corosync?
> 
> 2) If the answer to the above question is "yes", is the above
above mentioned solution capable of coexisting with oVirt in an hyperconverged
setup (assuming replica 3 etc. etc.)?
Off hand I can't think of any reason why not.
> 
> Many thanks in advance to anyone who can answer the above and/or point me
to any relevant resources/docs.
> 
https://github.com/linux-ha-storage/storhaug is basis for the Common HA
solution for NFS-Ganesha and Samba that GlusterFS-3.10 will be using.
N.B. It's also based on Pacemaker and Corosync.

-- 

Kaleb

Why are you using NFS for using Gluster with oVirt? oVirt is natively able
to mount Gluster volumes via FUSE, which is *far* more efficient!

Doug

On 12 January 2017 at 18:36, Giuseppe Ragusa <giuseppe.ragusa at
hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In light of the future removal of native Gluster-NFS (and also because of
> a worrying bug that causes NFS crashes, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/
> show_bug.cgi?id=1381970 then http://www.gluster.org/
> pipermail/gluster-users/2016-November/029333.html and recently
> http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2017-January/029632.html )
> I'm planning to move towards NFS-Ganesha.
>
> I have a couple of questions for which I could not find answers on the
> available docs (sorry if I missed something):
>
> 1) Is it possible (and advisable, in production too) today (3.8.x) to
> configure a GlusterFS based cluster to use NFS-Ganesha (as NFS v3/v4
> solution) and Samba (as CIFS solution) both controlled by CTDB as a highly
> available *and* load balanced (multiple IPs with DNS round-robin, not
> active/passive) storage solution? (note: I mean *without* using a full
> Pacemaker+Corosync stack)
>
> 2) If the answer to the above question is "yes", is the above
above
> mentioned solution capable of coexisting with oVirt in an hyperconverged
> setup (assuming replica 3 etc. etc.)?
>
> Many thanks in advance to anyone who can answer the above and/or point me
> to any relevant resources/docs.
>
> Best regards,
> Giuseppe
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170116/da42cfb8/attachment.html>