On 05/06/2011 03:05 PM, Whit Blauvelt wrote: > On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 09:04:20AM +0000, Max Ivanov wrote: >> Related question: >> is FUSE client smart enough to access storage directly, not via >> network if it is running on brick? > Not sure I follow the question. By "running on a brick" do you mean that the > OS was loaded from the brick? > > I'm new to this, but my best guess is you really never want to go to your > Gluster storage except through a Gluster mount (or NFS3 mount of that > Gluster mount - using the Gluster client's NFS capability) whether the mount > is local or from another system. Gluster uses extended file attributes > extensively. If you start also accessing files directly, those won't be > maintained properly. What you are saying is that it is not a good idea to access the data directly even in the case of a single storage server when no glusterfs client is running on that server. I would like a difinitive answer on this from developers if possible. > But a local mount of Gluster isn't using the network. You're just going > through fuse to the local storage. It's only going out on the network if > some of its storage is out there. It should work locally even if networking > is down. That would be easy enough to test. > > Hopefully someone will correct me if I've got some of this wrong. > > Whit >