My recommendation is: Don't go there man, especially if you are going through hell at work with your inheritance - don't add worries to your existing ones. Data is precious, fragile, and performance sensitive. On Nov 30, 2010, at 11:53 AM, JC de Villa wrote: > Hi list, > > First off, sorry if this message seems to ramble about. It's been a long day > that stretched through too many days. > > I'm currently reviewing gluster as storage for our servers. While not > storing a massive data set (yet), it is starting to grow. The current setup > is one that I inherited and basically has nothing going for it at the > moment. No redundancy, back up policies are next to non-existent and if it > all falls apart, I get to pick up the pieces and try to put them back > together. I'm trying to get a requisition through finance at the moment for > additional hardware. > > Anyway, we are running postgres for our databases. I was wondering how well > gluster fares with DB's? Drawbacks? Recommendations? I'll be putting up and > running a few VM's with gluster and run some tests to simulate the typical > workload for a day. It's usually more writes through the day with sporadic > reads when reports are generated. > > I've gone through the docs on the community site, but it's a bit short where > DB's are concerned. Either that or I'm looking at it backwards and shouldn't > be too concerned about running postgres on top of gluster. Any advice would > be appreciated. > > Thanks! > JC de Villa > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
