[Gluster-users] Add single server

Sun Apr 30 08:13:22 UTC 2017

> So I was a little but luck. If I has all the hardware part, probably i
> would be firesd after causing data loss by using a software marked as stable

Yes, we lost our data last year to this bug, and it wasn't a test cluster.
We still hear from it from our clients to this day.

> Is known that this feature is causing data loss and there is no evidence or
> no warning in official docs.
> 

I was (I believe) the first one to run into the bug, it happens and I knew it
was a risk when installing gluster.
But since then I didn't see any warnings anywhere except here, I agree
with you that it should be mentionned in big bold letters on the site.

Might even be worth adding a warning directly on the cli when trying to
add bricks if sharding is enabled, to make sure no-one will destroy a
whole cluster for a known bug.

> Il 30 apr 2017 12:14 AM, <lemonnierk at ulrar.net> ha scritto:
> 
> > I have to agree though, you keep acting like a customer.
> > If you don't like what the developers focus on, you are free to
> > try and offer a bounty to motivate someone to look at what you want,
> > or even better : go and buy a license for one of gluster's commercial
> > alternatives.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:43:54PM +0200, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
> > > I'm pretty sure that I'll be able to sleep well even after your block.
> > >
> > > Il 29 apr 2017 11:28 PM, "Joe Julian" <joe at julianfamily.org> ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > No, you proposed a wish. A feature needs described behavior, certainly
> > a
> > > > lot more than "it should just know what I want it to do".
> > > >
> > > > I'm done. You can continue to feel entitled here on the mailing list.
> > I'll
> > > > just set my filters to bitbucket anything from you.
> > > >
> > > > On 04/29/2017 01:00 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I repeat: I've just proposed a feature
> > > > I'm not a C developer and I don't know gluster internals, so I can't
> > > > provide details
> > > >
> > > > I've just asked if simplifying the add brick process is something that
> > > > developers are interested to add
> > > >
> > > > Il 29 apr 2017 9:34 PM, "Joe Julian" <joe at julianfamily.org> ha
> > scritto:
> > > >
> > > >> What I said publicly in another email ... but not to call out my
> > > >> perception of your behavior publicly if also like to say:
> > > >>
> > > >> Acting adversarial doesn't make anybody want to help, especially not
> > me
> > > >> and I'm the user community's biggest proponent.
> > > >>
> > > >> On April 29, 2017 11:08:45 AM PDT, Gandalf Corvotempesta <
> > > >> gandalf.corvotempesta at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 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/0
> > > >>>>>>> 27431.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
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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 --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170430/eebe047c/attachment.sig>