[Gluster-users] Avoid Split-brain and other stuff

Martin Emrich martin.emrich at empolis.com
Fri Nov 16 09:33:44 UTC 2012


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Brian Candler [mailto:B.Candler at pobox.com]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 16. November 2012 09:28
> An: Martin Emrich
> Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org
> Betreff: Re: [Gluster-users] Avoid Split-brain and other stuff
> > That would be perfectly acceptable, as long as it would heal
> > deterministically (last one wins, or renamed conflicting files)
> Not for me it wouldn't. "Last one wins" means "one set of updates thrown
> away", i.e.  definite data loss, which will be compounded when further
> updates take place.
> Automatic renaming means either that the file vanishes from its original name
> (so the application which looks for the file breaks anyway), or that one version
> has the original name and the other version is renamed - which can also result
> in irrepairable damage.

For my use case (File server), that would be highly unlikely, and acceptable in rare cases.
Of course it would be a "No-Go" for computing applications or database storage.

> What you don't want is both nodes to be up, both reachable only by a subset
> of clients, and updates occurring on both.

Hmm, that's exactly what I want (Branch offices temporarily disconnected can continue to work), thus GlusterFS is probably not the right tool for me.



More information about the Gluster-users mailing list