[Gluster-users] how well will this work

Joe Julian joe at julianfamily.org
Thu Dec 27 06:04:09 UTC 2012

It would probably be better to ask this with end-goal questions instead 
of with a unspecified "critical feature" list and "performance problems".

6 months ago, for myself and quite an extensive (and often impressive) 
list of users there were no missing critical features nor was there any 
problems with performance. That's not to say that they did not meet your 
design specifications, but without those specs you're the only one who 
could evaluate that.

On 12/26/2012 08:24 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I find myself trying to expand a 2-node high-availability cluster from 
> to a 4-node cluster.  I'm running Xen virtualization, and currently 
> using DRBD to mirror data, and pacemaker to failover cleanly.
> The thing is, I'm trying to add 2 nodes to the cluster, and DRBD 
> doesn't scale.  Also, as a function of rackspace limits, and the 
> hardware at hand, I can't separate storage nodes from compute nodes - 
> instead, I have to live with 4 nodes, each with 4 large drives (but 
> also w/ 4 gigE ports per server).
> The obvious thought is to use Gluster to assemble all the drives into 
> one large storage pool, with replication.  But.. last time I looked at 
> this (6 months or so back), it looked like some of the critical 
> features were brand new, and performance seemed to be a problem in the 
> configuration I'm thinking of.
> Which leads me to my question:  Has the situation improved to the 
> point that I can use Gluster this way?
> Thanks very much,
> Miles Fidelman

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list