[Gluster-users] Read from fastest node only
dcunningham at voisonics.com
Tue Aug 10 02:37:05 UTC 2021
Thanks for that reply. Under normal circumstances there would be nothing
that needs to be healed, but how can local-node know this is really the
case without checking the other nodes?
If using local-node tells GlusterFS not to check other nodes for the health
of the file at all then this sounds exactly like what we're looking for,
although only for a GlusterFS node that is also a client. My understanding
is that local-node isn't applicable to a machine that only has the client.
Does anyone know definitively what is the case here? If not I guess we
would need to test it.
On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 at 07:28, Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote:
> Il 2021-08-03 19:51 Strahil Nikolov ha scritto:
> > The difference between thin and usual arbiter is that the thin arbiter
> > takes in action only when it's needed (one of the data bricks is down)
> > , so the thin arbiter's lattency won't affect you as long as both data
> > bricks are running.
> > Keep in mind that thin arbiter is less used. For example, I have never
> > deployed a thin arbiter.
> Maybe I am horribly wrong, but local-node reads should *not* involve
> other nodes in any manner - ie: no checksum or voting is done for read.
> AFR hashing should spread different files to different nodes when doing
> striping, but for mirroring any node should have a valid copy of the
> requested data.
> So when using choose-local all reads which can really be local (ie: the
> requested file is available) should not suffer from remote party
> Is that correct?
> Danti Gionatan
> Supporto Tecnico
> Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
> email: g.danti at assyoma.it - info at assyoma.it
> GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
David Cunningham, Voisonics Limited
USA: +1 213 221 1092
New Zealand: +64 (0)28 2558 3782
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gluster-users