----- Original Message ----- > From: "Justin Clift" <justin@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: "Balamurugan Arumugam" <bala@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: "Kaushal M" <kshlmster@xxxxxxxxx>, gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx, "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 7:33:52 AM > Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Proposal for GlusterD-2.0 > > On 11/09/2014, at 2:46 AM, Balamurugan Arumugam wrote: > <snip> > > WRT glusterd problem, I see Salt already resolves most of them at > > infrastructure level. Its worth considering it. > > > Salt used to have (~12 months ago) a reputation for being really > buggy. Any idea if that's still the case? > I heard from various presentations about that due to zeromq 2.x issues. With zeromq 3.x, its all gone. But we could explore more on stability point of view. > Apart from that though, using Salt is an interesting idea. :) > Yes. I came across Salt currently for unified management for storage to manage gluster and ceph which is still in planning phase. I could think of a complete requirement of infra requirement to solve from glusterd to unified management. Calamari ceph management already uses Salt. It would be the ideal solution with Salt (or any infra) if gluster, ceph and unified management uses. Regards, Bala _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
