[Gluster-users] State of Gluster project

[Mahdi Adnan]

Hello Gionatan,

 Using Gluster brick in a RAID configuration might be safer and require
less work from Gluster admins but, it is a waste of disk space.
Gluster bricks are replicated "assuming you're creating a
distributed-replica volume" so when brick went down, it should be easy to
recover it and should not affect the client's IO.
We are using JBOD in all of our Gluster setups, overall, performance is
good, and replacing a brick would work "most" of the time without issues.

On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 8:43 PM Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote:

> Il 2020-06-21 14:20 Strahil Nikolov ha scritto:
> > With  every community project ,  you are in the position  of a Betta
> > Tester  - no matter Fedora,  Gluster  or CEPH. So far  ,  I had
> > issues with upstream  projects only diring and immediately after
> > patching  - but this is properly mitigated  with a  reasonable
> > patching strategy (patch  test environment and several months later
> > patch prod with the same repos).
> > Enterprise  Linux breaks (and alot) having 10-times more  users and
> > use  cases,  so you cannot expect to start to use  Gluster  and assume
> > that a  free  peoject won't break at all.
> > Our part in this project is to help the devs to create a test case for
> > our workload ,  so  regressions will be reduced to minimum.
>
> Well, this is true, and both devs & community deserve a big thanks for
> all the work done.
>
> > In the past 2  years,  we  got 2  major  issues with VMware VSAN and 1
> >  major  issue  with  a Enterprise Storage cluster (both solutions are
> > quite  expensive)  - so  I always recommend proper  testing  of your
> > software .
>
> Interesting, I am almost tempted to ask you what issue you had with
> vSAN, but this is not the right mailing list ;)
>
> > From my observations,  almost nobody  is complaining about Ganesha in
> > the mailing list -> 50% are  having issues  with geo replication,20%
> > are  having issues with small file performance and the rest have
> > issues with very old version of gluster  -> v5 or older.
>
> Mmm, I would swear to have read quite a few posts where the problem was
> solved by migrating away from NFS Ganesha. Still, for hyperconverged
> setup a problem remains: NFS on loopback/localhost is not 100% supported
> (or, at least, RH is not willing to declare it supportable/production
> ready [1]). A fuse mount would be the more natural way to access the
> underlying data.
>
> > I  can't say that a  replace-brick  on a 'replica  3' volume is more
> > riskier  than a rebuild  of a raid,  but I have noticed that nobody is
> >  following Red Hat's  guide  to use  either:
> > -  a  Raid6  of 12  Disks (2-3  TB  big)
> > -  a Raid10  of  12  Disks (2-3  TB big)
> > -  JBOD disks in 'replica  3' mode (i'm not sure about the size  RH
> > recommends,  most probably 2-3 TB)
> >  So far,  I didn' have the opportunity to run on JBODs.
>
> For the RAID6/10 setup, I found no issues: simply replace the broken
> disk without involing Gluster at all. However, this also means facing
> the "iops wall" I described earlier for single-brick node. Going
> full-Guster with JBODs would be interesting from a performance
> standpoint, but this complicate eventual recovery from bad disks.
>
> Does someone use Gluster in JBOD mode? If so, can you share your
> experience?
> Thanks.
>
> [1] https://access.redhat.com/solutions/22231 (accound required)
> [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489889 (old, but I can
> not find anything newer)
>
> --
> Danti Gionatan
> Supporto Tecnico
> Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it [1]
> email: g.danti at assyoma.it - info at assyoma.it
> GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
>


-- 
Respectfully
Mahdi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20200621/c803acd3/attachment.html>