[Gluster-users] Mounting localhost vs. remote host

[Ziemowit Pierzycki]

I used ucarp to create a virtual IP address that gets passed around.   DNS
load-balancing can work but it's not 100% failure free.  Mounting localhost
on boot can be fixed.  I've had problems mounting remote gluster hosts on
boot with Fedora 17 and 18 anyway.  I'll have to some do some more
experimentation I guess.  Here are my reasons for mounting localhost:

* decentralized (other than the glusterd on localhost)
* localhost may or may not be actual server automatically
* localhost figures out all the hosts in the cluster automatically
* no need to supply other names

I'm actually working on trying to bring GlusterFS+QEMU integration to
OpenNebula.  So I'm just thinking of embedding "localhost" into the storage
drivers for all the reasons mentioned above.


On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Marcus Bointon
<marcus at synchromedia.co.uk>wrote:

> On 23 Jul 2013, at 19:28, Ziemowit Pierzycki <ziemowit at pierzycki.com>
> wrote:
>
> I guess with mounting it via somehost, one would have to very picky to
> choose which host to pick as if it goes down that mount may stop working.
>  Am I correct?  So what is better?
>
>
> I've had real trouble mounting anything from localhost on boot, whereas
> remote works fine. Search the list archives.
>
> Marcus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20130723/4e65a66d/attachment.html>