On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Shyam <srangana at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/01/2017 02:00 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>
>> Splitting the bricks need not be a post factum decision, we can
>> start with larger brick counts, on a given node/disk count, and
>> hence spread these bricks to newer nodes/bricks as they are added.
>>
>>
>> Let's say we have 1 disk, we format it with say XFS and that
becomes a
>> brick at the moment. Just curious, what will be the relationship
between
>> brick to disk in this case(If we leave out LVM for this example)?
>>
>
> I would assume the relation is brick to provided FS directory (not brick
> to disk, we do not control that at the moment, other than providing best
> practices around the same).
>
Hmmm... as per my understanding, if we do this then 'df' I guess will
report wrong values? available-size/free-size etc will be counted more than
once?
>
> Today, gluster takes in a directory on host as a brick, and assuming we
> retain that, we would need to split this into multiple sub-dirs and use
> each sub-dir as a brick internally.
>
> All these sub-dirs thus created are part of the same volume (due to our
> current snapshot mapping requirements).
>
--
Pranith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170501/aa79593e/attachment.html>