--- "Amar S. Tumballi" <amar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hence we came up with a namespace design, which
> will not contain any critical data, and also it
> can rebuild from scratch if you choose to use
> different new namespace after a while.
Silly, question, does that mean that the namespace can
be destroyed between mounts? If yes, would it mean
that it gets rebuilt on each mount or would it
be filled lazily?
> About your question, whether its mandatory to use
> namespace, YES it is. If you don't give this
> option, you will not be able to mount GlusterFS
> filesystem.
It seems like it would be neat to be able to use the
schedulers from the unify translator without a
namespace to get the ability to do load balancing on
across AFRed backend servers. I know that AFR load
balancing is on the roadmap, but since the schedulers
offer a nice variety of algorithms, I was wondering if
using the unify translators wouldn't already work (or
be close to working) without actually doing
unification?
-Martin
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
