yipikai7 at gmail.com
2017-Mar-30 08:14 UTC
[Gluster-users] Node count constraints with EC?
On 30/03/2017 08:35, Ashish Pandey wrote:> Good point Cedric!! > The only thing is that, I would prefer to say "bricks" instead of > "nodes" in your statement. > > "starting with 4 bricks (3+1) can only evolve by adding 4 bricks (3+1)"Oh right, thanks for correcting me ! Cheers> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From: *"Cedric Lemarchand" <yipikai7 at gmail.com> > *To: *"Terry McGuire" <tmcguire at ualberta.ca> > *Cc: *gluster-users at gluster.org > *Sent: *Thursday, March 30, 2017 11:57:27 AM > *Subject: *Re: [Gluster-users] Node count constraints with EC? > > > > Le 29 mars 2017 ? 20:29, Terry McGuire <tmcguire at ualberta.ca> a ?crit : > > > > I was thinking I?d spread these over 4 nodes, and add single nodes > over time, with subvolumes rearranged over new nodes to maintain > protection from whole node failures. > > Also keep in mind that dispersed cluster can only be expanded by the > number of initial nodes, eg starting with 4 nodes 3+1 can only evolve > by adding 4 nodes 3+1, you cannot change the default policy 3+1 to > 4+1. So the granularity of the evolution of the cluster is fixed at > the beginning. > > Cheers > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170330/5dbae57c/attachment.html>
Thanks Ashish, Cedric, for your comments. I?m no longer concerned about my choice of 4 nodes to start, but, I realize that there?s an issue with my subvolume config options. Turns out only my 8+3 choice is permitted, as the 4+2 and 8+4 options violate the data/parity>2 rule. So, 8+3 it is, as 8+2 isn?t quite enough redundancy for me. Regards, Terry> On Mar 30, 2017, at 02:14, yipikai7 at gmail.com wrote: > > On 30/03/2017 08:35, Ashish Pandey wrote: >> Good point Cedric!! >> The only thing is that, I would prefer to say "bricks" instead of "nodes" in your statement. >> >> "starting with 4 bricks (3+1) can only evolve by adding 4 bricks (3+1)" > Oh right, thanks for correcting me ! > > Cheers > >> >> From: "Cedric Lemarchand" <yipikai7 at gmail.com> <mailto:yipikai7 at gmail.com> >> To: "Terry McGuire" <tmcguire at ualberta.ca> <mailto:tmcguire at ualberta.ca> >> Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:gluster-users at gluster.org> >> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 11:57:27 AM >> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Node count constraints with EC? >> >> >> > Le 29 mars 2017 ? 20:29, Terry McGuire <tmcguire at ualberta.ca> <mailto:tmcguire at ualberta.ca> a ?crit : >> > >> > I was thinking I?d spread these over 4 nodes, and add single nodes over time, with subvolumes rearranged over new nodes to maintain protection from whole node failures. >> >> Also keep in mind that dispersed cluster can only be expanded by the number of initial nodes, eg starting with 4 nodes 3+1 can only evolve by adding 4 nodes 3+1, you cannot change the default policy 3+1 to 4+1. So the granularity of the evolution of the cluster is fixed at the beginning. >> >> Cheers >> _______________________________________________ >> Gluster-users mailing list >> Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> >> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users> >> >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170330/e21a1015/attachment.html>