[Gluster-users] Bricks vs LVM

[Mark s2c]

Given it some thought, and am probably going to create bricks with logical volumes of multiple disks and expose the lvols as bricks to gluster so if disks fail, we can just pull them out and replace them. I need to check how LVM covers failed devices and it means we can extend the lvol and gluster should have more space without having add bricks explicitly. Thanks

On 19 Sep 2014, at 22:56, "Juan José Pavlik Salles" <jjpavlik at gmail.com<mailto:jjpavlik at gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi Mark, as far as I know LVM gives you mainly flexibility. For instance if you have a big RAID 5 volume, you can split it in smaller pieces and make bricks for different volumes instead of having just a big brick. If you want to keep things simple you can avoid LVM as long as you don't really need it.

2014-09-19 9:51 GMT-03:00 Mark s2c <mark at stuff2cloud.com<mailto:mark at stuff2cloud.com>>:
What would you say are the efficiencies of using LVM to upgrade and add capacity to the glusterFS and this increasing the size of the bricks? Does gluster need to do anything when bricks are increased in size suddenly?

Or should I really be not using LVM and adding more bricks explicitly?

Just been thinking about this slide deck
http://rhsummit.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/black_w_1650_red_hat_storage_server_administration_deep_dive1.pdf

And why LVM is optional - I want to simplify my grid as much as poss.

Cheers Mark
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users at gluster.org<mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users



--
Pavlik Salles Juan José
Blog - http://viviendolared.blogspot.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20140920/ba59a861/attachment.html>