Roman
2016-Mar-28 21:58 UTC
[Gluster-users] glusterfs best usage / best storage type or model
and another pretty important thing - will I be able to grow this volume by simpli adding few bricks more? Or how is it going to go with expansion? 2016-03-28 14:49 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>:> have anyone had any disaster recovery actions on such setup? > For how long it could take to heal the volume in case of disk failure? > and count in this setup means, how many bricks will be counted as bricks > for meta-data ? > Just need some more information on this kind of setup, seems like I like > it :) > > 2016-03-28 14:21 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>: > >> Hi Joe, >> >> thanks for an answer. but in the case of 37 8TB bricks the data won't be >> available if one of servers fails anyway :) And it seems to me, that it >> would be even bigger mess to undarstand, what files are up and what are >> down with bricks.. Or am I missing something? Reading this one >> https://gluster.readthedocs.org/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Setting%20Up%20Volumes/#creating-dispersed-volumes >> And what would be the redundancy count in case of 37 8TB bricks? still 1? >> >> 2016-03-28 11:53 GMT+03:00 Joe Julian <joe at julianfamily.org>: >> >>> You're "wasting" the same amount of space either way. Make 37 8TB bricks >>> and use disperse. >>> >>> >>> On March 28, 2016 10:33:52 AM GMT+02:00, Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Thanks for an option, but it seems that it is not that good in our >>>> situation. I can't waste storage space on bricks for disperse and disperse >>>> volumes require having bricks of the same size. We will start with >>>> distributed volume of uneven size at the beginning. As we are speaking of >>>> archive server, it is not that critical, if some portion of data won't be >>>> available for some time (maintenance time). Having like 22 disks per server >>>> makes the proability of raid5 failure,when 2 or more disks will fail a bit >>>> higher though, so I'll really have to decide something about it :) >>>> >>>> 2016-03-28 1:35 GMT+03:00 Russell Purinton <russell.purinton at gmail.com> >>>> : >>>> >>>>> You might get better results if you forget about using RAID all >>>>> together >>>>> >>>>> For example, GlusterFS supports ?disperse? volumes which act like >>>>> RAID5/6. It has the advantage that you can maintain access to things even >>>>> if a whole server goes down. If you are using local RAID for redundancy and >>>>> that server goes offline you?ll be missing files. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mar 27, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Need an advice from heavy glusterfs users and may be devs.. >>>>> >>>>> Going to give a try for glusterfs in new direction for me. All the >>>>> time I was using GlusterFS as VM storage for KVM guests. >>>>> >>>>> Now going to use it as a main distributed storage archive for >>>>> digitalized (scanned) books in one of libraries in Estonia. >>>>> >>>>> At the very start we are going to scan about 346 GB - 495 GB daily, >>>>> which is about 7000 - 10 000 pages. 600 GB in the future. There are some >>>>> smaller files per book: a small xml file and compressed pdf (while all the >>>>> original files will be tiff). This data goes to production server and then >>>>> we are going to archive it on our new glusterfs archive. >>>>> >>>>> At this moment, we've got 2 servers: >>>>> >>>>> one with 22x8TB 5400 RPM SATA HDD disks >>>>> second with 15x8TB 5400 RPM SATA HDD disks >>>>> We are planning to add remaining disks to the second server at the end >>>>> of the year, being budget based institue is crap, I know. So it should be >>>>> as easy as extend LVM volume and remount it. >>>>> >>>>> Both the servers will run raid5 or raid6, haven't decided yet, but as >>>>> we need as much storage space as possibe per server, seems like it will be >>>>> raid5. >>>>> >>>>> At this moment I'm planing to create just a single distributed storage >>>>> over these two servers and mount them on the production server, so it could >>>>> archive files there. So it would be like 168+112 = 280 TB storage pool. We >>>>> are planing to extend this one anually, by adding HDDs to second server at >>>>> the end of first year and then adding some storage by extending the ammount >>>>> of servers, wich means, just adding the bricks to the distributed storage >>>>> massive. >>>>> >>>>> Any better solutions or possibilities ? >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Roman. >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Gluster-users mailing list >>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org >>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Best regards, >>>> Roman. >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Gluster-users mailing list >>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org >>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Roman. >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Roman. >-- Best regards, Roman. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20160329/cad25d29/attachment.html>
Roman
2016-Mar-29 08:06 UTC
[Gluster-users] glusterfs best usage / best storage type or model
According to this: http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2014-November/019443.html it is not that easly possible. 2016-03-29 0:58 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>:> and another pretty important thing - will I be able to grow this volume by > simpli adding few bricks more? Or how is it going to go with expansion? > > 2016-03-28 14:49 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>: > >> have anyone had any disaster recovery actions on such setup? >> For how long it could take to heal the volume in case of disk failure? >> and count in this setup means, how many bricks will be counted as bricks >> for meta-data ? >> Just need some more information on this kind of setup, seems like I like >> it :) >> >> 2016-03-28 14:21 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>: >> >>> Hi Joe, >>> >>> thanks for an answer. but in the case of 37 8TB bricks the data won't be >>> available if one of servers fails anyway :) And it seems to me, that it >>> would be even bigger mess to undarstand, what files are up and what are >>> down with bricks.. Or am I missing something? Reading this one >>> https://gluster.readthedocs.org/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Setting%20Up%20Volumes/#creating-dispersed-volumes >>> And what would be the redundancy count in case of 37 8TB bricks? still 1? >>> >>> 2016-03-28 11:53 GMT+03:00 Joe Julian <joe at julianfamily.org>: >>> >>>> You're "wasting" the same amount of space either way. Make 37 8TB >>>> bricks and use disperse. >>>> >>>> >>>> On March 28, 2016 10:33:52 AM GMT+02:00, Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for an option, but it seems that it is not that good in our >>>>> situation. I can't waste storage space on bricks for disperse and disperse >>>>> volumes require having bricks of the same size. We will start with >>>>> distributed volume of uneven size at the beginning. As we are speaking of >>>>> archive server, it is not that critical, if some portion of data won't be >>>>> available for some time (maintenance time). Having like 22 disks per server >>>>> makes the proability of raid5 failure,when 2 or more disks will fail a bit >>>>> higher though, so I'll really have to decide something about it :) >>>>> >>>>> 2016-03-28 1:35 GMT+03:00 Russell Purinton <russell.purinton at gmail.com >>>>> >: >>>>> >>>>>> You might get better results if you forget about using RAID all >>>>>> together >>>>>> >>>>>> For example, GlusterFS supports ?disperse? volumes which act like >>>>>> RAID5/6. It has the advantage that you can maintain access to things even >>>>>> if a whole server goes down. If you are using local RAID for redundancy and >>>>>> that server goes offline you?ll be missing files. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 27, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Need an advice from heavy glusterfs users and may be devs.. >>>>>> >>>>>> Going to give a try for glusterfs in new direction for me. All the >>>>>> time I was using GlusterFS as VM storage for KVM guests. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now going to use it as a main distributed storage archive for >>>>>> digitalized (scanned) books in one of libraries in Estonia. >>>>>> >>>>>> At the very start we are going to scan about 346 GB - 495 GB daily, >>>>>> which is about 7000 - 10 000 pages. 600 GB in the future. There are some >>>>>> smaller files per book: a small xml file and compressed pdf (while all the >>>>>> original files will be tiff). This data goes to production server and then >>>>>> we are going to archive it on our new glusterfs archive. >>>>>> >>>>>> At this moment, we've got 2 servers: >>>>>> >>>>>> one with 22x8TB 5400 RPM SATA HDD disks >>>>>> second with 15x8TB 5400 RPM SATA HDD disks >>>>>> We are planning to add remaining disks to the second server at the >>>>>> end of the year, being budget based institue is crap, I know. So it should >>>>>> be as easy as extend LVM volume and remount it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Both the servers will run raid5 or raid6, haven't decided yet, but as >>>>>> we need as much storage space as possibe per server, seems like it will be >>>>>> raid5. >>>>>> >>>>>> At this moment I'm planing to create just a single distributed >>>>>> storage over these two servers and mount them on the production server, so >>>>>> it could archive files there. So it would be like 168+112 = 280 TB storage >>>>>> pool. We are planing to extend this one anually, by adding HDDs to second >>>>>> server at the end of first year and then adding some storage by extending >>>>>> the ammount of servers, wich means, just adding the bricks to the >>>>>> distributed storage massive. >>>>>> >>>>>> Any better solutions or possibilities ? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Roman. >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list >>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org >>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Roman. >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> Gluster-users mailing list >>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org >>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Roman. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Roman. >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Roman. >-- Best regards, Roman. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20160329/552e4893/attachment.html>
Roman
2016-Apr-02 11:13 UTC
[Gluster-users] glusterfs best usage / best storage type or model
No ideas? It means I should keep to my first plan? Raid6 and single volume? 2016-03-29 11:06 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>:> According to this: > http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2014-November/019443.html > it is not that easly possible. > > 2016-03-29 0:58 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>: > >> and another pretty important thing - will I be able to grow this volume >> by simpli adding few bricks more? Or how is it going to go with expansion? >> >> 2016-03-28 14:49 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>: >> >>> have anyone had any disaster recovery actions on such setup? >>> For how long it could take to heal the volume in case of disk failure? >>> and count in this setup means, how many bricks will be counted as bricks >>> for meta-data ? >>> Just need some more information on this kind of setup, seems like I like >>> it :) >>> >>> 2016-03-28 14:21 GMT+03:00 Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com>: >>> >>>> Hi Joe, >>>> >>>> thanks for an answer. but in the case of 37 8TB bricks the data won't >>>> be available if one of servers fails anyway :) And it seems to me, that it >>>> would be even bigger mess to undarstand, what files are up and what are >>>> down with bricks.. Or am I missing something? Reading this one >>>> https://gluster.readthedocs.org/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Setting%20Up%20Volumes/#creating-dispersed-volumes >>>> And what would be the redundancy count in case of 37 8TB bricks? still >>>> 1? >>>> >>>> 2016-03-28 11:53 GMT+03:00 Joe Julian <joe at julianfamily.org>: >>>> >>>>> You're "wasting" the same amount of space either way. Make 37 8TB >>>>> bricks and use disperse. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On March 28, 2016 10:33:52 AM GMT+02:00, Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for an option, but it seems that it is not that good in our >>>>>> situation. I can't waste storage space on bricks for disperse and disperse >>>>>> volumes require having bricks of the same size. We will start with >>>>>> distributed volume of uneven size at the beginning. As we are speaking of >>>>>> archive server, it is not that critical, if some portion of data won't be >>>>>> available for some time (maintenance time). Having like 22 disks per server >>>>>> makes the proability of raid5 failure,when 2 or more disks will fail a bit >>>>>> higher though, so I'll really have to decide something about it :) >>>>>> >>>>>> 2016-03-28 1:35 GMT+03:00 Russell Purinton < >>>>>> russell.purinton at gmail.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> You might get better results if you forget about using RAID all >>>>>>> together >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For example, GlusterFS supports ?disperse? volumes which act like >>>>>>> RAID5/6. It has the advantage that you can maintain access to things even >>>>>>> if a whole server goes down. If you are using local RAID for redundancy and >>>>>>> that server goes offline you?ll be missing files. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mar 27, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Roman <romeo.r at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Need an advice from heavy glusterfs users and may be devs.. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Going to give a try for glusterfs in new direction for me. All the >>>>>>> time I was using GlusterFS as VM storage for KVM guests. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Now going to use it as a main distributed storage archive for >>>>>>> digitalized (scanned) books in one of libraries in Estonia. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At the very start we are going to scan about 346 GB - 495 GB daily, >>>>>>> which is about 7000 - 10 000 pages. 600 GB in the future. There are some >>>>>>> smaller files per book: a small xml file and compressed pdf (while all the >>>>>>> original files will be tiff). This data goes to production server and then >>>>>>> we are going to archive it on our new glusterfs archive. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At this moment, we've got 2 servers: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> one with 22x8TB 5400 RPM SATA HDD disks >>>>>>> second with 15x8TB 5400 RPM SATA HDD disks >>>>>>> We are planning to add remaining disks to the second server at the >>>>>>> end of the year, being budget based institue is crap, I know. So it should >>>>>>> be as easy as extend LVM volume and remount it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Both the servers will run raid5 or raid6, haven't decided yet, but >>>>>>> as we need as much storage space as possibe per server, seems like it will >>>>>>> be raid5. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At this moment I'm planing to create just a single distributed >>>>>>> storage over these two servers and mount them on the production server, so >>>>>>> it could archive files there. So it would be like 168+112 = 280 TB storage >>>>>>> pool. We are planing to extend this one anually, by adding HDDs to second >>>>>>> server at the end of first year and then adding some storage by extending >>>>>>> the ammount of servers, wich means, just adding the bricks to the >>>>>>> distributed storage massive. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any better solutions or possibilities ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Roman. >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list >>>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org >>>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Roman. >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list >>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org >>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Best regards, >>>> Roman. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Roman. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Roman. >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Roman. >-- Best regards, Roman. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20160402/f819d48a/attachment.html>