[Gluster-users] thin arbiter vs standard arbiter

[Amar Tumballi]

This recently added document talks about some of the technicalities of the
feature:

https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Thin-Arbiter-Volumes/

Please go through and see if it answers your questions.

-Amar


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:09 PM, wkmail <wkmail at bneit.com> wrote:

> I see mentions of thin arbiter in the 4.x notes and I am intrigued.
>
> As I understand it, the thin arbiter volume is
>
> a) receives its data on an async basis (thus it can be on a slower link).
> Thus gluster isn't waiting around to verify if it actually got the data.
>
> b) is only consulted in situations where Gluster needs that third vote,
> otherwise it is not consulted.
>
> c) Performance should therefore be better because Gluster is only
> seriously talking to 2 nodes instead of 3 nodes (as in normal arbiter or
> rep 3)
>
> Am I correct?
>
> If so, is thin arbiter ready for production or at least use on
> non-critical workloads?
>
> How safe is it for VMs images (and/or VMs with sharding)?
>
> How much faster is thin arbiter setup over a normal arbiter given that the
> normal data only really sees the metadata?
>
> In a degraded situation (i.e. loss of one real node), would having a thin
> arbiter on a slow link be problematic until everything is healed and
> returned to normal?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> -wk
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
>
>


-- 
Amar Tumballi (amarts)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20180801/a403daf7/attachment.html>