[Gluster-users] Need help making a decision choosing MS DFS or Gluster+SAMBA+CTDB

[Ira Cooper]

Mathieu Chateau <mathieu.chateau at lotp.fr> writes:

> I do have DFS-R in production, that replaced sometimes netapp ones.
> But no similar workload as my current GFS.
>
> In active/active, the most common issue is file changed on both side (no
> global lock)
> Will users access same content from linux & windows ?

If you want to go active/active.  I'd recommend Samba + CTDB + Gluster. 

You want true clustering, and a system that can handle the locking etc.

I'd layer normal DFS to do "namespace" control, and to help with
handling failover, or just use round robin DNS.

Thanks,

-Ira