[Gluster-users] Exorbitant cost to achieve redundancy??

[Jeff Wiegley]

I'm trying to justify a GlusterFS storage system for my technology
development group and I want to get some clarification on
something that I can't seem to figure out architecture wise...

My storage system will be rather large. Significant fraction of a
petabyte and will require scaling in size for at least one decade.

from what I understand GlusterFS achieves redundancy through
replication. And from the documentation: Section 5.5 Creating
Distributed Replicated Volumes the note says "The number of bricks
should be a multiple of the replica count for a distributed replicated 
volume."

Is this telling me that if I want to be able to suffer 2 bricks failing
that I have to deploy three bricks at a time and the amount of space
I wind up with available is essentially equal to only that provided
by a single brick?

In other words... GlusterFS TRIPLES all my storage costs to provide
2 brick fault tolerance?

How do I get redundancy in GlusterFS while getting reasonable
storage costs where I am not wasting 50% of my investment or
more in providing copies to obtain redundancy?

Thank you.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20120213/c7c9ac1c/attachment.html>