On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 08:13:37AM -0700, Anand Avati wrote: > Whit, > There has been no drop in goal. There are many parts to "supporting a VM > workload". The goals listed for 3.3 are definitely met - to make VMs work good > enough (fix self-heal locking issues, some FUSE upstream work for supporting > O_DIRECT etc.) However, for 3.4 we have bigger goals of supporting VM image use > case in a much better way - libglusterfsclient integration for QEMU etc. This > was what Amar was referring to. I hope I clarified your doubt, and apologies > for the confusion. Thanks for the clarification, Avanti. So if "VMs work good enough" now, the recommendation is that in general Gluster is ready for production work with VMs? Performance should be acceptable, if not always spectacular? Or should VM use be considered more in the beta area still, until 3.3.1 or whatever? I know there's no substitute for testing it in a particular environment. Just trying to get the general overview before committing to that. Regards, Whit
