[Gluster-users] Add single server

[Gandalf Corvotempesta]

Mine was a suggestion
Fell free to ignore was gluster users has to say and still keep going
though your way

Usually, open source project tends to follow users suggestions

Il 29 apr 2017 5:32 PM, "Joe Julian" <joe at julianfamily.org> ha scritto:

> 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.
>
>
> On 04/29/2017 07:12 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
>
>> Anyway, the proposed workaround:
>> https://joejulian.name/blog/how-to-expand-glusterfs-replicat
>> ed-clusters-by-one-server/
>> won't work with just a single volume made up of 2 replicated bricks.
>> If I have a replica 2 volume with server1:brick1 and server2:brick1,
>> how can I add server3:brick1 ?
>> I don't have any bricks to "replace"
>>
>> This is something i would like to see implemented in gluster.
>>
>> 2017-04-29 16:08 GMT+02:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta
>> <gandalf.corvotempesta at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> 2017-04-24 10:21 GMT+02:00 Pranith Kumar Karampuri <pkarampu at redhat.com
>>> >:
>>>
>>>> Are you suggesting this process to be easier through commands, rather
>>>> than
>>>> for administrators to figure out how to place the data?
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2016-July/
>>>> 027431.html
>>>>
>>> Admin should always have the ability to choose where to place data,
>>> but something
>>> easier should be added, like in any other SDS.
>>>
>>> Something like:
>>>
>>> gluster volume add-brick gv0 new_brick
>>>
>>> if gv0 is a replicated volume, the add-brick should automatically add
>>> the new brick and rebalance data automatically, still keeping the
>>> required redundancy level
>>>
>>> In case admin would like to set a custom placement for data, it should
>>> specify a "force" argument or something similiar.
>>>
>>> tl;dr: as default, gluster should preserve data redundancy allowing
>>> users to add single bricks without having to think how to place data.
>>> This will make gluster way easier to manage and much less error prone,
>>> thus increasing the resiliency of the whole gluster.
>>> after all , if you have a replicated volume, is obvious that you want
>>> your data to be replicated and gluster should manage this on it's own.
>>>
>>> Is this something are you planning or considering for further
>>> implementation?
>>> I know that lack of metadata server (this is a HUGE advantage for
>>> gluster) means less flexibility, but as there is a manual workaround
>>> for adding
>>> single bricks, gluster should be able to handle this automatically.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-users mailing list
>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170429/daa18894/attachment.html>