[Gluster-users] Question re 2-server Mirrored setup

[Raghavendra G]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Sy" <andy.sy at neotitans.com>
To: gluster-users at gluster.org
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 7:45:28 PM GMT +04:00 Abu Dhabi / Muscat
Subject: [Gluster-users] Question re 2-server Mirrored setup

In the sample config for a 2-server mirror setup at:

http://gluster.org/docs/index.php/Automatic_File_Replication_(Mirror)_across_Two_Storage_Servers

both volumes are considered remote and use
tcp as transport-type.  If you intend to use
a local volume as one of the 2 servers in a
mirrored setup, is there any advantage in defining
glusterfs.vol as below?

volume remote
   type protocol/client
   option transport-type tcp
   option remote-host w.x.y.z
   option remote-subvolume brick
end-volume

volume posix
   type storage/posix
   option directory /localstoragedir
end-volume

volume local
   type features/posix-locks
   subvolumes posix
end-volume

volume replicate
   type cluster/replicate
   subvolumes local remote
end-volume

yes, with read-subvolume specified to be local, reads will be faster. Also, since first child of replicate will be lock-server, keeping the local subvolume as first child will increase performance.

read-subvolume to replicate can be specified using "option read-subvolume local"

========================
http://www.neotitans.com
Web and IT Consulting
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users at gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users