On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 13:24:55 -0800 Dan Cyr <dcyr at truenorthmanagement.com> wrote: > I also don?t think this is a rant. I, as well, have been following this list for a few years, and have been waiting for GlusterFS to stabilize for VM deployment. I hope this discussion helps the devs understand areas that people are waiting for. > > We have 2 SAN servers with Infiniband connections to a Blade Center. I would like all the KVM VMs hosted on the SAN with the ability to add more SAN servers in the future. ? Currently Gluster allows this via NFS but I?ve read about performance issues. ? So, right now, after 2 years of not deploying this gear (and running the VMs images on each blade), am looking for an expandable solution for the backend storage so I stop manually babying this network and install OpenNebula so I?m not the only person in our office who can manage our VM infrastructure. > > This does fit into the OP?s question because I would love to see GlusterFS work like this. > > Miles - As is right now GlusterFS is not what you want for backend VM storage. > Question: ?how well will this work? > Answer: ?horribly? > > Dan > > > From: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org] On Behalf Of John Mark Walker > Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:39 PM > To: Stephan von Krawczynski > Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org > Subject: Re: how well will this work > > > Stephan, > > I'm going to make this as simple as possible. Every message to this list should follow these rules: > > 1. be helpful > 2. be constructive > 3. be respectful > > I will not tolerate ranting that serves no purpose. If your message doesn't follow any of the rules above, then you shouldn't be posting it. > > This is your 2nd warning. > > -JM Hola JM, are you aware that your above message has neither arrived at my side through the list, nor through personal mail. Does this mean I got deleted from the list by you? -- Regards, Stephan
