Re: Request for "read-only" translator

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Steffen,
Sorry there was A mistake in my reply. The Unify schedulers cannot schedule
based on whether a sub-volume is read-only or not. Hence when a new file
creation operation comes, the scheduler _cannot_ neglect the read-only
subvolumes for creating the file. There is a fairly good chance that the
file creation operation be scheduled on a read-only subvolume which ofcourse
will fail.

On 6/30/07, Raghavendra G <raghavendra.hg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Steffen,
Please find the answers inlined.

On 6/28/07, Steffen Grunewald < steffen.grunewald@xxxxxxxxxx > wrote:
>
> With glusterfs 1.3 getting close to a releasable state, I started
> thinking
> about the structure of a global namespace for our applications.
> There will be "mirrored machines" (AFR) for crucial data, and there
> should
> be part of the servers offering read-only stuff (making sure nothing
> gets
> added to the filesystem) perhaps also on top of an AFR layer (for the
> super important, time critical input data repositories).
> This results in the following structure (with individual "units" in
> varying
> counts):
>
> brick1a
>       > AFR (mirror) > readonly
> brick1b                          \
>                                  |
> brick2a                          |
>       > AFR (mirror) > readonly  |
> brick2b                           > unify
>                                  |
> brick3 (AFR if I'm paranoid)     |
> brick4 (can be AFR)              |
> brick5 (can be AFR)              /
> ...
>
> (Apologies for the ASCII graphics.)
>
> Bricks 1 and 2 (which come in two copies) would store the "never lose
> this"
> stuff while it's still possible to work (store new data) on the other
> bricks.
>
> Of course, two features are essential for such a setup:
> - a "readonly" xlator (does the "filter" xlator yield this? couldn't
> find
>         anything about "option" syntax)


Yes.  "Filter" xlator gives the read-only functionality. And it accepts no
options.

- a "unify" xlator which can handle read-only subvolumes (can it already?
>         does this have an influence on the choice for schedulers?)


There should be no problem with  unify handling read-only subvolumes.

Is there someone who already implemented this to some extent and is
> willing
> to share her/his config? Any suggestions which scheduler to choose?
>
> Cheers,
> Steffen
>
> --
> Steffen Grunewald * MPI Grav.Phys.(AEI) * Am Mühlenberg 1, D-14476
> Potsdam
> Cluster Admin * http://pandora.aei.mpg.de/merlin/ *
> http://www.aei.mpg.de/
> * e-mail: steffen.grunewald(*)aei.mpg.de *
> +49-331-567-{fon:7233,fax:7298}
> No Word/PPT mails - http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>


regards,
--
Raghavendra G



regards,
--
Raghavendra G


[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Users]     [Ceph Users]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux