if you are worrying about the disk failure will bring all your data
unavailable,the distributed replica volume is a good choice.
2016?11?17?????jin deng <cheneydeng88 at gmail.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cheneydeng88 at
gmail.com');>> ???
>
>
> 2016?11?17??????? <dylan-lili at foxmail.com> ???
>
>> In distributed volume, the files will be distributed to different
>> bricks.But,my data is a folder if it's lack of a file,the folder of
data
>> will be disabled.So, I want a specific folder will be store one brick
to
>> avoid dropping a brick and all data is disable.
>>
>
> I don't understand your purpose.It seems you want all your data which
> inside one specific directory to be stored on a fixed brick(without dht)
> instead of letting the data dispersed among all bricks.IMO,that violates
> the model of "distributed volume".Not sure if i've
misunderstood your
> purpose.Maybe someone will give a different opinion.
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> DengJin
>
>
--
Thanks,
DengJin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20161117/fc1e8aae/attachment.html>