[Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.1 on Amazon EC2 Challenge
barry.jaspan at acquia.com
Mon Oct 25 23:25:13 UTC 2010
I was speaking generally in my message because I did not know anything about
your actual situation (maybe because I did not read carefully). From this
message, I understand your goal to be: You have a "source EBS volume" that
you would like to replace with a gluster filesystem containing the same
data. Based on this, my personal recommendation (which carries no official
weight whatsoever) is:
1. On your gluster fileservers, mount whatever bricks you want. It sounds
you want cluster/distribute over two cluster/replicate volumes over two 1TB
EBS volumes each, so put two 1TB bricks on each server and export them.
2. From the machine holding the source EBS volume, mount the gluster bricks
created in step 1 under a volfile that arranges them under
cluster/distribute and cluster/replicate as you wish.
3. rsync -a /source-ebs /mnt/gfs
4. Switch your production service to use /mnt/gfs.
5. rsync -a /source-ebs /mnt/gfs again to catch any stragglers. The actual
details of when/how to run rsync, whether to take down production, etc.
depend on your service, of course.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Gart Davis <gdavis at spoonflower.com> wrote:
> My priincipal concerns with this relate to Barry's 3rd bullet: Gluster
> does not rebalance evenly, and so this solution will eventually bounce
> off the roof and lock up.
We had a replicate volume. We added distribute on top of it, added a
subvolume (which was another replicate volume), and used gluster's
"rebalance" script which consists of removing certain extended attributes,
renaming files, and copying them back into place. The end result was that
not very much data got moved to the new volume. Also, that approach to
rebalancing has inherent race conditions. The best you can do to add more
storage space to an existing volume is to set your min-free-disk low enough
(perhaps 80%) so that each time a new file is added that should go to the
old full brick gluster will instead create a link file on the old brick
pointing to the new brick, and put the real data on the new brick. This
imposes extra link-following overhead, but I believe it works.
Forgive my naivete Barry, when you say 'just use larger replicate
> volumes instead of distribute', what does that mean?
After our fiasco trying to switch from a single replicate volume to
distribute over two replicates (having all the problems I just described),
we just went back to a single replicate volume, and increased our EBS volume
sizes. They were only 100GB, and we made them 500GB. This worked because EBS
allows it. If/when we need the bricks to be bigger than 1TB... well I hope
gluster has improved its capabilities by that point. If not, we might use
lvm or whatever on the glusterfs server to make multple ebs volumes look
like >1TB bricks.
> Are you running
> multiple 1 tb EBS bricks in a single 'replica 2' volume under a single
> file server? My recipe is largely riffing off Josh's tutorial.
> You've clearly found a recipe that you're happy to entrust production
> data to... how would you change this?
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
Senior Architect | Acquia <http://acquia.com>
barry.jaspan at acquia.com | (c) 617.905.2208 | (w) 978.296.5231
"Get a free, hosted Drupal 7 site: http://www.drupalgardens.com"
More information about the Gluster-users