On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:23:39 -0700 Keith Freedman <freedman at FreeFormIT.com> wrote: > >http://www.gluster.org/docs/index.php/High-availability_storage_using_server-side_AFR > > Mine's almost exactly the same as your example in the wiki with the > following exceptions: > in the tcp/client section: > I hadn't had a transport-timeout set.. I've added this so that may > make a difference? In my experience, the default transport-timeout setting is too high for this particular configuration ; when one of the servers would fail, the clients would take far too long to figure it out, thus defeating the purpose of having an HA service. :P Whether that would affect your particular scenario is debatable, however. > And the remote volume is the posix locks volume instead of the > storage volume-- I had thought that in order for locking to work > correctly, you have to make sure the lock is shared and this was the > way to do that? To be fair, locking only needs to be enabled if your environment poses the risk of multiple simultaneous attempted writes on a single object (a scenario which, somewhat surprisingly, is less likely than it appears in many environments). For testing purposes you might try disabling this functionality altogether and seeing if it makes a difference. -- Daniel Maher <dma AT witbe DOT net>