<html><head></head><body>I am just a user, one that's been here for ten years. I've been highly involved in the community and spend countless hours if my own time contributing by helping users on irc.<br>
<br>
I'm not a C developer and so I do not contribute code.<br>
<br>
My point is that suggesting something is very different from contributing an idea. The most common user suggestion is probably the one about how Gluster should be faster about replicating across high latency connections, with no understanding of the speed of light or how to ensure consistency.<br>
<br>
I have gotten to know many of the developers over the years. They would be happy to discuss possible solutions and once adequately formed, implement them. You should help. There is plenty that you can contribute if you would be willing to put in some time.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On April 29, 2017 11:08:45 AM PDT, Gandalf Corvotempesta <gandalf.corvotempesta@gmail.com> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="auto">Mine was a suggestion<div dir="auto">Fell free to ignore was gluster users has to say and still keep going though your way</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Usually, open source project tends to follow users suggestions</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br /><div class="gmail_quote">Il 29 apr 2017 5:32 PM, "Joe Julian" <<a href="mailto:joe@julianfamily.org">joe@julianfamily.org</a>> ha scritto:<br type="attribution" /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Since this is an open source community project, not a company product, feature requests like these are welcome, but would be more welcome with either code or at least a well described method. Broad asks like these are of little value, imho.<br />
<br />
<br />
On 04/29/2017 07:12 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:<br />
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Anyway, the proposed workaround:<br />
<a href="https://joejulian.name/blog/how-to-expand-glusterfs-replicated-clusters-by-one-server/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://joejulian.name/blog/ho<wbr />w-to-expand-glusterfs-replicat<wbr />ed-clusters-by-one-server/</a><br />
won't work with just a single volume made up of 2 replicated bricks.<br />
If I have a replica 2 volume with server1:brick1 and server2:brick1,<br />
how can I add server3:brick1 ?<br />
I don't have any bricks to "replace"<br />
<br />
This is something i would like to see implemented in gluster.<br />
<br />
2017-04-29 16:08 GMT+02:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta<br />
<<a href="mailto:gandalf.corvotempesta@gmail.com" target="_blank">gandalf.corvotempesta@gmail.c<wbr />om</a>>:<br />
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
2017-04-24 10:21 GMT+02:00 Pranith Kumar Karampuri <<a href="mailto:pkarampu@redhat.com" target="_blank">pkarampu@redhat.com</a>>:<br />
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Are you suggesting this process to be easier through commands, rather than<br />
for administrators to figure out how to place the data?<br />
<br />
[1] <a href="http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2016-July/027431.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.gluster.org/piper<wbr />mail/gluster-users/2016-July/<wbr />027431.html</a><br />
</blockquote>
Admin should always have the ability to choose where to place data,<br />
but something<br />
easier should be added, like in any other SDS.<br />
<br />
Something like:<br />
<br />
gluster volume add-brick gv0 new_brick<br />
<br />
if gv0 is a replicated volume, the add-brick should automatically add<br />
the new brick and rebalance data automatically, still keeping the<br />
required redundancy level<br />
<br />
In case admin would like to set a custom placement for data, it should<br />
specify a "force" argument or something similiar.<br />
<br />
tl;dr: as default, gluster should preserve data redundancy allowing<br />
users to add single bricks without having to think how to place data.<br />
This will make gluster way easier to manage and much less error prone,<br />
thus increasing the resiliency of the whole gluster.<br />
after all , if you have a replicated volume, is obvious that you want<br />
your data to be replicated and gluster should manage this on it's own.<br />
<br />
Is this something are you planning or considering for further implementation?<br />
I know that lack of metadata server (this is a HUGE advantage for<br />
gluster) means less flexibility, but as there is a manual workaround<br />
for adding<br />
single bricks, gluster should be able to handle this automatically.<br />
</blockquote>
______________________________<wbr />_________________<br />
Gluster-users mailing list<br />
<a href="mailto:Gluster-users@gluster.org" target="_blank">Gluster-users@gluster.org</a><br />
<a href="http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.gluster.org/mailm<wbr />an/listinfo/gluster-users</a><br />
</blockquote>
<br />
______________________________<wbr />_________________<br />
Gluster-users mailing list<br />
<a href="mailto:Gluster-users@gluster.org" target="_blank">Gluster-users@gluster.org</a><br />
<a href="http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.gluster.org/mailm<wbr />an/listinfo/gluster-users</a><br />
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>