[Gluster-users] [Gluster-devel] Proposal for GlusterD-2.0

[mike]

I'm so glad to read this. I was thinking the same thing.

On Sep 11, 2014, at 7:22 AM, Jeff Darcy <jdarcy at redhat.com> wrote:

>> For distributed store, I would think of MongoDB which provides
>> distributed/replicated/highly available/master read-write/slave read-only
>> database.  Lets get what community think about SaltStack and/or MongoDB.
> 
> 
> I definitely do not think MongoDB is the right tool for this job.  I'm
> not one of those people who just bash MongoDB out of fashion, either.  I
> frequently defend them against such attacks, and I used MongoDB for some
> work on CloudForms a while ago.  However, a full MongoDB setup carries a
> pretty high operational complexity, to support high scale and rich
> features . . . which we don't need.  This part of our system doesn't
> need sharding.  It doesn't need complex ad-hoc query capability.  If we
> don't need those features, we *certainly* don't need the complexity that
> comes with them.  We need something with the very highest levels of
> reliability and consistency, with as little complexity as possible to go
> with that.  Even its strongest advocates would probably agree that
> MongoDB doesn't fit those requirements very well.
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users