More setup more points to manage. Not a good design. Anyways, it's personal choice of simplicity of maintenance vs features. Please see cassandra how they have done it. Gluster also manged to do it without masters unlike mogileFS, sphere. Same methodology is possible if it's designed from ground up. On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Count Zero <countz at gmail.com> wrote: > At least sectore-sphere uses UDT so It's really very fast, and from all the technologies i've seen, has a higher chance of success. Plus the developers are very responsive, and fix things very quickly (if/when something comes up). I think that's THE deciding factor for me. > > And I don't see how you can give up masters if you want a properly synchronized master/master setup?! Are you expecting some quantum magic will happen using parallel universes? :-) > > For anything to be replicated properly between master/master systems, you need to have either a distributed locking/file management mechanisms that are properly synchronized between all hosts, or some kind of 'eventual consistency' model where changes to the file are replicated 'eventually' (good for situations where real-time replication is not a requirement). In both cases, we're talking about pretty complex mechanisms to get right. Think about cases where one host suddenly lost connectivity (quite common in WAN scenarios), how do you "replay" the changes once it's back... > > > On Mar 21, 2011, at 12:06 AM, Mohit Anchlia wrote: > >> I looked at sector-sphere but it has same problem of having metadata >> servers etc. like other DFS systems like mogileFS has. It adds more >> moving parts and maintenance. Also, I have not been able to get hold >> of enough data to say sector-sphere is reliable and robust. >> >> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Count Zero <countz at gmail.com> wrote: >>> As others responded, Gluster is not ready for WAN scenarios, and it is unclear if/when it will be... >>> I am following the Gluster project closely, and have been using it for a year now on various internal test clusters. >>> >>> What can work for you right now is a project called 'sector-sphere'. It is actually built with WAN in mind, is more secure than Gluster (uses encryption), and even supports a topology map, something Gluster does not do (yet). >>> >>> (And by the way, even when it IS finally announced in Gluster, then based on my experience with Gluster, I would be very wary to use the first version until a second or third version is released with bug fixes/improvements for the WAN mechanisms. Not trying to diss the technology, just being responsible and think you should be cautious and test things out thoroughly before pushing anything to production!). >>> >>> >>> On Mar 19, 2011, at 8:42 PM, Brent Clark wrote: >>> >>>> Hiya >>>> >>>> I would like to know if you can or if anyone is using Gluster in a geolocation setup for a Distributed filesystem sense. >>>> >>>> Reason I ask is. I got this two machines, and they are continents apart (Datacentre South Africa (Johannesburg) and Datacentre Germany). Currently Im using rsync to pull all updated and modified files. >>>> I was hoping I could use Gluster as a Active / Active Filesystem. >>>> >>>> If someone could share any thoughts or suggestions, it would be appreciated. >>>> Kind Regards >>>> Brent Clark >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gluster-users mailing list >>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org >>>> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gluster-users mailing list >>> Gluster-users at gluster.org >>> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>> > >
