[Gluster-users] Need help making a decision choosing MS DFS or Gluster+SAMBA+CTDB

[Ira Cooper]

Mathieu Chateau <mathieu.chateau at lotp.fr> writes:

> Hello,
>
> what do you mean by "true" clustering ?
> We can do a Windows Failover cluster (1 virtual ip, 1 virtual name), but
> this mean using a shared storage like SAN.
>
> Then it depends on your network topology. If you have multiple geographical
> sites / datacenter, then DFS-R behave a lot better than Gluster in
> replicated mode. Users won't notice any latency,
> At the price that replication is async.

I assumed a Gluster context.  In order to cluster on gluster, you'll
need CTDB to keep the locking between the nodes consistent so you don't
run into the issues you mentioned with DFS-R from your mail.  (I don't
use DFS-R, and I haven't.)

If you have multi-site replication... you probably want it async, unless
you have really good links or low throughput requirements :).

Thanks,

-Ira