Thanks for your response Pranith and Mathieu,
Pranith: To answer your question, I am planning to use this storage for two
main workloads.
1. As a shared storage for VMs.
2. As a NFS Storage for files.
We are a online backup company so we store few hundred Terra bytes of data.
Mathieu: I appreciate your concern, however as a system admins sometimes we
get paranoid and try to control everything under the Sun.
I know I can only control what I can.
Having said that, No, I have pair of servers to start with so at the moment
I am just evaluating and preparing for proof of concept, after which I am
going to propose to my management, if they are happy then we will proceed
further.
Regards,
Dev
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Mathieu Chateau <mathieu.chateau at
lotp.fr>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> For any system, 36 disks raise disk failure probability. Do you plan
> GlusterFS with only one server?
>
> You should think about failure at each level and be prepared for it:
>
> - Motherboard failure (full server down)
> - Disks failure
> - Network cable failure
> - File system corruption (time needed for fsck)
> - File/folder removed by mistake (backup)
>
> Using or not raid depend on your answer on these questions and performance
> needed.
> It also depend how "good" is raid controller in your server, like
if it
> has battery and 1GB of cache.
>
> When many disks are bought at same time (1 order, serial number close to
> each other), they may fail in near time to each other (if something bad
> happened in manufactory).
> I already saw like 3 disks failing in few days.
>
> just my 2 cents,
>
>
>
> Cordialement,
> Mathieu CHATEAU
> http://www.lotp.fr
>
> 2016-01-12 4:36 GMT+01:00 Pranith Kumar Karampuri <pkarampu at
redhat.com>:
>
>>
>>
>> On 01/12/2016 04:34 AM, Pawan Devaiah wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> We have a fairly powerful server sitting at office with 128 Gig RAM and
>> 36 X 4 TB drives. I am planning to utilize this server as a backend
storage
>> with GlusterFS on it.
>> I have been doing lot of reading on Glusterfs, but I do not see any
>> definite recommendation on having RAID on GLUSTER nodes.
>> Is it recommended to have RAID on GLUSTER nodes specially for the
bricks?
>> If Yes, is it not contrary to the latest Erasure code implemented in
>> Gluster or is it still not ready for production environment?
>> I am happy to implement RAID but my two main concern are
>> 1. I want to make most of the disk space available.
>> 2. I am also concerned about the rebuild time after disk failure on the
>> RAID.
>>
>> What is the workload you have?
>>
>> We found in our testing that random read/write workload with Erasure
>> coded volumes is not as good as we get with replication. There are
>> enhancements in progress at the moment to address these things which we
are
>> yet to merge and re-test.
>>
>> Pranith
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-users mailing listGluster-users at
gluster.orghttp://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20160112/a9a8d1db/attachment.html>