Amar S. Tumballi a écrit : > Yep, > i agree with krishna, AFR is not visible to usr. It should happen in > background, so why the user should be aware of all the 3 or 2 replicated > copies? For a user, if he writes 1MB, he wants to see 1MB as used space. > So, > showing the sizeof the first server is better idea. (or even size of > smallest is good too). > > -bulde I'm not confident with this idea of "first" server. Maybe some users will be interested in the way of replicate files over smaller disk. the gluster client should be aware of all bricks status. But you're right, maybe it's should not be an info to show on the df command, but it would sure be useful to have it on the client to avoid the user to connect every bricks to retrieve the status of each of them. Cheers, Sebastien. > > On 6/4/07, Krishna Srinivas <krishna@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 6/4/07, Anand Avati <avati@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > (fwd'ing to gluster-devel) >> > >> > > >> > > Maybe it could give a sum-up of each "replica"-bricks ? >> > >> > this makes sense too, where you show the total storage as X, which >> > gets 'consumed' much faster (as in, when you add a 1MB file, 2 or 3 MB >> > gets counted for 'used' according to the replication count) >> >> No, I think this might confuse the users. >> I think showing the info of the first server will be good because >> of the reasons mentioned by you in the previous mail. Lets see >> if we can come up with an ideal solution. >> >> Krishna >> >> > >> > any opinions? >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Anand V. Avati
