On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 at 10:04pm, Rudi Ahlers wrote
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Emmanuel Noobadmin
> <centos.admin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> One of the problem with Lustre's style of distributed storage which
>> Gluster points out is that the bottleneck is the meta server which
>> tells clients where to find the actual data. Gluster supposedly scales
>> with every client machine added because it doesn't use a meta server,
>> file locations are determined using some kind of computed hash.
>>
>
> But who uses gluster in a production environment then? I have seen
> less posts (both on forums and mailing lists) about Glusteter, than
> lustre.
I just finished testing a Gluster setup using some of my compute nodes.
Based on those results, I'll be ordering 8 storage bricks (25 drives each)
to start my storage cluster. I'll be using Gluster to a) replicate
frequently used data (e.g. biologic databases) across the whole storage
cluster and b) provide a global scratch space. The clients will be the
570 (and growing) nodes of my HPC cluster, and Gluster will be helping to
take some of the load off my overloaded NetApp.
They also have a page on their website listing self-reported users
<http://www.gluster.org/gluster-users/>.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
QB3 Shared Cluster Sysadmin
UCSF
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
