Gluster users - Aug 2017 - GlusterFS as virtual machine storage

Il 25-08-2017 14:22 Lindsay Mathieson ha scritto:
> On 25/08/2017 6:50 PM, lemonnierk at ulrar.net wrote:
> 
> I run Replica 3 VM hosting (gfapi) via a 3 node proxmox cluster. Have
> done a lot of rolling node updates, power failures etc, never had a
> problem. Performance is better than any other DFS I've tried (Ceph,
> lizard/moose).
Hi, very interesting! Are you using client or server quorum?
> Never did get DRDB working.
This surprise me: I found DRBD quite simple to use, albeit I mostly use 
active/passive setup in production (with manual failover)
> nb: ZFS Bricks, with each brick RAID10 - so a little paranoid on the
> redundancy :)
Yeah, I remember you on the zfs-discuss mailing list ;)
> For me, glusters biggest problem is its lack of flexibility in adding
> bricks and nodes.And replacing them is an exercise in nail biting.?
> Hoping V4 improves on this though maybe that will lead to performance
> trade offs.
Can you elaborate? What are the biggest problems/inconvenience?

Thanks.

-- 
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.danti at assyoma.it - info at assyoma.it
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8

> 
> This surprise me: I found DRBD quite simple to use, albeit I mostly use 
> active/passive setup in production (with manual failover)
> 
I think you are talking about DRBD 8, which is indeed very easy. DRBD 9
on the other hand, which is the one that compares to gluster (more or
less), is a whole other story. Never managed to make it work correctly
either
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170825/96c64055/attachment.sig>

On 8/25/2017 12:43 PM, lemonnierk at ulrar.net wrote:
>
> I think you are talking about DRBD 8, which is indeed very easy. DRBD 9
> on the other hand, which is the one that compares to gluster (more or
> less), is a whole other story. Never managed to make it work correctly
> either
>

Yes, and I noticed that Digimer's Anvil project still uses DRBD8 as well.

https://www.alteeve.com/w/Build_an_m2_Anvil

If she is still using DRBD8 on her stuff, then you know that DRBD9 isn't 
fully baked yet.

That being said we use DRBD? on projects such as NFS servers and found 
it to be reliable, easy to use and useful as long as we stayed with 
active/passive.

Our experiments with active/active were very unsatisfactory. OCFS2 in 
particular was very unhappy with lots of disk i/o, even just stats. We 
tried GFS2 as well but bailed due to stability (lockup) issues (probably 
our fault, but still not worth the effort).

Il 25-08-2017 21:43 lemonnierk at ulrar.net ha scritto:
> I think you are talking about DRBD 8, which is indeed very easy. DRBD 9
> on the other hand, which is the one that compares to gluster (more or
> less), is a whole other story. Never managed to make it work correctly
> either
Oh yes, absolutely DRBD version 8.4.x
In my opinion, DRBD 9.x needs to mature.

Thanks.

-- 
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.danti at assyoma.it - info at assyoma.it
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8