[Gluster-users] Cheers and some thoughts

[Michael Watters]

Have you done comparisons against Lustre?  From what I've seen Lustre
performance is 2x faster than a replicated gluster volume.



On 1/4/17 5:43 PM, Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
> Hi all, just wanted to mention that since I had sole use of our
> cluster over the holidays and a complete set of backups :) I decided
> to test some alternate cluster software and do some stress testing.
>
>
> Stress testing involved multiple soft and *hard* resets of individual
> servers and hard simultaneous resets of the entire cluster, where a
> hard reset is equivalent to a power outage.
>
>
> Gluster (3.8.7) coped perfectly - no data loss, no maintenance
> required, each time it came up by itself with no hand holding and
> started healing nodes, which completed very quickly. VM's on gluster
> auto started with no problems, i/o load while healing was ok. I felt
> quite confident in it.
>
>
> The alternate cluster fs - not so good. Many times running VM's were
> corrupted, several times I lost the entire filesystem. Also IOPS where
> atrocious (fuse based). It easy to claim HA when you exclude such
> things as power supply failures, dodgy network switches etc.
>
>
> I think glusters active/active quorum based design, where is every
> node is a master is a winner, active/passive systems where you have a
> SPOF master are difficult to DR manage.
>
>
> However :) Things I'd really like to see in Gluster:
>
> - More flexible/easier management of servers and bricks
> (add/remove/replace)
>
> - More flexible replication rules
>
> One of the things I really *really* like with LizardFS is the powerful
> goal system and chunkservers. Nodes and disks can be trivially easily
> added/removed on the fly and chunks will be shuffled, replicated or
> deleted to balance the system. Individual objects can have difference
> goals (replication levels) which can also be changed on the fly and
> the system will rebalance them. Objects can even be changed from/to
> simple replication to Erasure Encoded objects.
>
>
> I doubt this could be fitted to the existing gluster, but is there
> potential for this sort of thing in Gluster 4.0? I read the design
> docs and they look ambitious.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>