[Gluster-devel] Client side afr versus server side, doing a self-heal

[Krishna Srinivas]

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Amar S. Tumballi <amar at zresearch.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Brandon Lamb <brandonlamb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  > Basically yea. So with server side afr server1 would send a copy to
>  > server2.
>  >
>  > With client side, client1 copies from server1 to itself, then copies
>  > from itself to server2, correct?
>  >
>  >
>  You have made a very good point. Generally when we setup a storage, or
>  recommend it, we consider a fresh setup. We recommend client side afr (or
>  any other clustering translators) because it got its own benefits like, open
>  fds will remain intact even if the subvolume goes down.
>
>  In the scenario like you described, I would say, server side afr helps a
>  lot. But if I am setting up GlusterFS, I will rather use rsync or scp to
>  copy the data to server2 from server1 directly, and then start afr on client
>  node.  I know GlusterFS should work fine for healing even that, but
>  considering opening each file to heal it through GlusterFS, its the same or
>  less effort to start with symmetric export points.
>
>  Krishna,
>   How does it handle two files without any attributes but have same data?

An attribute-less file is treated as a file with version 1. So using rsync/scp
will work fine.

Krishna

>
>  Regards,
>  Amar
>
>
>
>  --
>  Amar Tumballi
>  Gluster/GlusterFS Hacker
>  [bulde on #gluster/irc.gnu.org]
>  http://www.zresearch.com - Commoditizing Super Storage!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>  Gluster-devel mailing list
>  Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
>  http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>