[Gluster-users] how many hosts could be down in a 12x(4+2) distributed dispersed volume?

Sunil Kumar Heggodu Gopala Acharya sheggodu at redhat.com
Wed Sep 20 07:34:59 UTC 2017

Hi Mauro Tridici,

>From the information provided it appears like you have placed 2 bricks of a
subvolume on one host. Please confirm.

The number of hosts that could go down without losing access to data can be
derived based on the brick configuration/distribution. Please let us know
the brick distribution plan.


Sunil kumar Acharya

Senior Software Engineer

Red Hat


T: +91-8067935170 <http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/>

TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted>

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Mauro Tridici <mauro.tridici at cmcc.it>

> Dear All,
> I just implemented a (6x(4+2)) DISTRIBUTED DISPERSED gluster (v.3.10)
> volume based on the following hardware:
> - 3 gluster servers (each server with 2 CPU 10 cores, 64GB RAM, 12 hard
> disk SAS 12Gb/s, 10GbE storage network)
> Now, we need to add 3 new servers with the same hardware configuration
> respecting the current volume topology.
> If I'm right, we will obtain a DITRIBUTED DISPERSED gluster volume with 12
> subvolumes, each volume will contain (4+2) bricks, that is a [12x(4+2)]
> volume.
> My question is: in the current volume configuration, only 2 bricks per
> subvolume or one host could be down without losing data. What it will
> happen in the next configuration? How many hosts could be down without
> losing data?
> Thank you very much.
> Mauro Tridici
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170920/f8d287a9/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list