Forgot the link to the bug, [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890502 Comment 2 in particular shows all the described problems On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Kaushal M <kshlmster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi all, > We have a problem with how we identify peers in GlusterFS which we > need to solve. > > Peers in GlusterFS are currently identified using two keys. > - the address of the peer (hostname/ip) > - a UUID > The address is used as an identifier in the gluster cli commands and > is the key visible to the users of glusterfs. The UUID is used > internally by glusterd to identify peers. > This approach works well when we are using glusterfs on systems with > single network interfaces and when we are using a hostname as the > address. We run into problems when we multiple network interfaces are > involved or if hostname and ips are mixed in gluster cli commands. > Bug-890502 [1] is a good example of the problems we have. This bug > involves usage of multiple interfaces as well as mixing of > hostname/ip. > > We need to come up with a good solution to this which would solve this. > > Some of the solutions that have been thought of are below. > > 1. Continue with the current implementation of using UUID internally > and addresses externally, but provide a good translation interface > which will translate a given address into UUID correctly. The > translation interface might involve some network requests which could > increase the time taken for command execution. > > 2. Use the UUID itself both internally and externally, and have a > command for associating a list of addresses with a UUID. The downside > is that typing out UUIDs is unwieldy and users will need users to > execute more commands. > > 3. Similar to 2, but use an alias for the peer externally instead of > the UUID. This will need an additional mechanism to specify the alias > for a peer. This approach will need users one additional command > compared to approach 2, but the other commands will be simpler to > type. > > > > What are your thoughts about the problem and the proposed solutions? > If anyone has any questions regarding the problem or the solutions, or > if there is a better solution, please sound off. > > Thanks, > Kaushal
