[Gluster-users] NoSQL tools that run on Gluster

[Peter Portante]

Greg Kleiman <gkleiman at redhat.com> writes:

> I agree with Jeff that there are overlaps between NoSQL and gluster,
> but there are customers using NoSQL as a metadata store to front end
> gluster as an object store using the native client.

We have seen setups like this with Gluster-Swift. The work being done on
Gluster-Swift in the future will go a long way to efficiently using
Gluster as a object store.

Regards,

-peter

> Jeff's suggestion
> of using libgfapi or special translators can add even more features
> and performance.
>
> Thanks, Greg
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Darcy" <jdarcy at redhat.com>
> To: "Jay Vyas" <jayunit100 at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Gluster-users at gluster.org" <gluster-users at gluster.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2013 11:26:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] NoSQL tools that run on Gluster
>
> On 05/01/2013 01:50 PM, Jay Vyas wrote:
>> There has been chatter about "X on gluster", where x=mongo, riak,...
>> 
>> Im wondering - is there a "most popular" or most well tested
>> transactional datastore that runs/leverages gluster ? 
>> 
>> Or is the idea of running a transactional nosql tool on gluster still
>> mostly a fun/cool/interesting thought experiment?
>
> I follow developments in the NoSQL world pretty closely, and count many
> people in that space as my friends.  This idea comes up often, but
> nobody really pursues it much because what they do and what we do is
> already so similar.  The consistent hashing we use in DHT is clearly of
> the same general sort as that used in Cassandra, Riak, or Voldemort.
> Some of the discussions we've had about various forms of replication and
> different consistency models clearly relate well to those same concepts
> in MongoDB or Couchbase.  If we're using the same algorithms for things
> like distribution and replication already, why put one on top of the
> other?  Putting Cassandra on top of GlusterFS would be too much like
> putting Cassandra on top of itself.
>
> That said, there are a couple of related ideas that are somewhat
> interesting.  Most have to do with splicing pieces of these related
> technologies together instead of layering them.  What if we could layer
> our front end (full POSIX via FUSE plus SMB/NFS support) on top of their
> back end?  What if we could put their API on top of our back end with a
> specialized translator or libgfapi, much as we're doing for Swift and
> Hadoop?  There are plenty of possibilities like that to explore.
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users