Ahh, that makes sense. Can I add a quorum only node to V3.7.18? Thanks CC On 5 Jan. 2017 4:02 pm, "Kevin Lemonnier" <lemonnierk at ulrar.net> wrote:> > I've configured two test gluster servers (RHEL7) running glusterfs > 3.7.18. > > [...] > > Any ideas what I'm doing wrong? > > I'd say you need 3 servers. GlusterFS goes RO without a quorum, and one > server > isn't a quorum. That's to avoid split brains. > > -- > Kevin Lemonnier > PGP Fingerprint : 89A5 2283 04A0 E6E9 0111 > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170106/e58319c2/attachment.html>
Kevin Lemonnier
2017-Jan-05 22:21 UTC
[Gluster-users] gluster native client failover testing
> Can I add a quorum only node to V3.7.18?I guess you can add a peer without puttin a brick on it, not sure how safe that is though. If the issue is space or performances, just use an arbiter node, it won't use much disk and it'll just keep metadatas I believe. That way the volume will always have a way to know how to heal, and should never go RO. -- Kevin Lemonnier PGP Fingerprint : 89A5 2283 04A0 E6E9 0111 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170105/9e132f6b/attachment.sig>