I did not intend to mean that you were criticizing (in case it sounded like it) :-) (Users have right to criticize, it is a good way to make the product better) As Gordon said in his reply, only one byte is written to AFR's subvols, the entire file is not replicated. Krishna On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Marcus Herou <marcus.herou@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I didn't mean to criticize GlusterFS at all, just taking Daniel's word how > GlusterFS works. I'm quite a noob at GlusterFS in particular and large > storage solutions in general. > > If it is true that the files will be pushed back and forth by just updating > one byte in them it will be an issue however if that's not the case then I > can carry on with my first intent which is to use GlusterFS for storing and > accessing indexed data. > > > > Kindly > > //Marcus > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Daniel Maher <dma+gluster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Fri, 9 May 2008 15:37:40 +0530 "Krishna Srinivas" >> <krishna@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > >> Do you plan to do any AFR (automatic file replication) ? If so, >> > >> consider that even a one-byte change to your "big index files" will >> > >> cause the /entire/ file to be AFR'd between all participating >> > >> nodes. >> > >> > Marcus, what do you mean by this? >> > >> > Krishna >> >> You've mis-attributed the quote, Krishna. What i meant was exactly >> what i said : if you have a 5GB file on an AFR cluster, and a client >> makes a one-byte change to that file, then the entire 5GB file is >> re-copied to all members of the AFR cluster. >> >> At least, that's my understanding of the situation - please correct me >> if i'm wrong. :) >> >> -- >> Daniel Maher <dma AT witbe.net> > > > > -- > Marcus Herou CTO and co-founder Tailsweep AB > +46702561312 > marcus.herou@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.tailsweep.com/ > http://blogg.tailsweep.com/
