On 01/07/2016 02:24 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > Kaleb KEITHLEY <kkeithle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I was in the middle of composing a reply along pretty much the same >> lines when I saw Jeff's reply land in my inbox. >> >> We are migrating from gnfs to NFS-Ganesha for NFS; NFS-Ganesha uses >> GFAPI. If Samba isn't already using a GFAPI-based VFS, it will be soon. >> >> FUSE isn't the best answer, IMO, to the "universal storage" question. > > I thought FUSE was the only way to acheive automatic failover on server > failure. Am I wrong? > GFAPI has exactly the same AFR fail-over mechanism as FUSE. We've actually discussed — very theoretically — reimplementing the FUSE client with GFAPI, but for now "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." On Linux we use Pacemaker+Corosync to provide Highly Available NFS with NFS-Ganesha. At present Samba still uses CTDB, but will also be able to use Pacemaker+Corosync in a forthcoming release. I haven't looked to see what sort of HA solutions exist in the *BSD world. That might make for a good Google Summer of Code project. -- Kaleb _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
