[Gluster-users] single storage server

Nick Birkett nick at concurrent-thinking.com
Fri May 6 15:46:19 UTC 2011

On 05/06/2011 03:05 PM, Whit Blauvelt wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 09:04:20AM +0000, Max Ivanov wrote:
>> Related question:
>> is FUSE client smart enough to access storage directly, not via
>> network if it is running on brick?
> Not sure I follow the question. By "running on a brick" do you mean that the
> OS was loaded from the brick?
> I'm new to this, but my best guess is you really never want to go to your
> Gluster storage except through a Gluster mount (or NFS3 mount of that
> Gluster mount - using the Gluster client's NFS capability) whether the mount
> is local or from another system. Gluster uses extended file attributes
> extensively. If you start also accessing files directly, those won't be
> maintained properly.
What you are saying is that it is not a good idea to access the data directly even in the case
of a single storage server when no glusterfs client is running on that server.

I would like a difinitive answer on this from developers if possible.

> But a local mount of Gluster isn't using the network. You're just going
> through fuse to the local storage. It's only going out on the network if
> some of its storage is out there. It should work locally even if networking
> is down. That would be easy enough to test.
> Hopefully someone will correct me if I've got some of this wrong.
> Whit

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list