> If your images easily fit within the bricks, why do you need sharding in >> the first place? It adds an extra layer of complexity & removes the cool >> feature of having entire files on each brick, making DR & things a lot >> easier. > > > Because healing with large VM images completes orders of magnitude faster > and consumes far less bandwidth/cpu/disk IO >Isn't that only the case with full, non-granular heals? And according to the docs, "full" forces a resync of the entire volume, not just the out-of-sync files. Seems a bit overkill for anything other than a brick replacement... One question - how do you plan to convert the VM's?> > - setup a new volume and copy the VM images to that? > > - or change the shard setting inplace? (I don't think that would work) >AFAIK, if you enable sharding on a volume, it will only apply to new files. An easier option might be to enable sharding & then clone the VMs to create new VHDs. Doug -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170120/c4ce3d4d/attachment.html>
Lindsay Mathieson
2017-Jan-20 15:43 UTC
[Gluster-users] Convert to Shard - Setting Guidance
On 21/01/2017 1:26 AM, Gambit15 wrote:> And according to the docs, "full" forces a resync of the entire > volume, not just the out-of-sync files. Seems a bit overkill for > anything other than a brick replacement... >Just the files that need healing and for sharded volumes thats the individual shards. -- Lindsay Mathieson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170121/9a247056/attachment.html>