[Gluster-users] LSI Syncro CS with Glusterfs

Eric Horwitz e3gh75 at gmail.com
Wed Aug 20 13:56:07 UTC 2014

Okay so this is as I speculated. There would not be an automated way to do
this that is already built into gluster.

Maybe this is really a feature request then.....

Wouldn't it be advantageous to be able to replicate the path through 2
servers to the same brick instead of replicating the data on the brick. The
assumption being there is a HA failover path built into the hardware to the

server1(M) -----> /dev/brick1 <------ server2(S)
server3(M) -----> /dev/brick2 <------ server4(S)

Active server nodes are server1 and server3
Slave server nodes are server2 and server4

If server1 went down server2 would take over

to build this volume would use syntax like:

*# volume create glfs1 stripe 2 server1,server2:/dev/brick1
The point to all of this is cost savings by using active-active storage
without needing to replicate data. Active-active storage is more expensive
than a typical JBODs however, I wouldn't need 2 JBODs for the same space
with replication thereby reducing $/GiB cost.


On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 6:08 AM, Vijay Bellur <vbellur at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 08/20/2014 02:15 AM, Eric Horwitz wrote:
>> Well the idea is to build a dual server cluster in a box using hardware
>> meant more for Windows storage server 2012. This way we do not need to
>> replicate data across the nodes since the 2 servers see the same block
>> storage and you have active failover on all the hardware. Dataon has a
>> system for this and they even suggest using gluster however, I cannot
>> seem to figure out how to implement this model. All gluster nodes would
>> need to be active and there doesn't seem to be a master - slave failover
>> model. Thoughts?
> One way of doing this could be:
> - Both servers have to be part of the gluster trusted storage pool.
> - Create a distributed volume with a brick from one of the servers, say
> server1.
> - Upon server failover, replace/failover the brick by bringing in a new
> brick from server2. Both old and new bricks would need to refer to the same
> underlying block storage. I am not aware of what hooks Syncro provides to
> perform this failover. Brick replacement without any data migration can be
> achieved by:
> volume replace-brick <volname> <src-brick> <dst-brick> commit force
> -Vijay
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20140820/09702c03/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list