On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 17:22:35 +0530 "Krishna Srinivas" <krishna@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > you don't need unify/namespace for your setup here, you can > directly export gfs-ds-afr from the server which can be mounted > on the client. Can you paste your client spec? if you are connecting Hello again :) As you note above, using "unify/namespace" is not necessary, nor recommended for a two-node HA cluster using AFR. During failover tests, using the Unify translator caused the mountpoint to become completely inaccessible when one of the nodes failed - removing said translator solved the problem. You also noted (in the same thread) that the following wiki page is wrong : http://www.gluster.org/docs/index.php/GlusterFS_1.3_High_Availability_Storage_with_GlusterFS As it indicates the usage of Unify in this context. I then noted that the AFR page *itself* suggests using Unify : http://www.gluster.org/docs/index.php/Understanding_AFR_Translator In this case, it is done in order to link the namespace to the remote volumes. Are we or are we not supposed to use the Unify translator in conjunction with AFR ? If we are, why does it cause the mountpoint to fail if one of the AFR'd nodes fails, and how can this be solved ? If we are not, what is the recommended way to implement a namespace with AFR ? For reference purposes, the relavent threads are : http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gluster-devel/2008-04/msg00074.html http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gluster-devel/2008-04/msg00078.html -- Daniel Maher <dma AT witbe.net>
