On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:14:02AM +0000, Fernando Frediani (Qube) wrote: > Going to the idea of using RAID controllers would you think that for say > 16 disks(or 12) Raid 5 would be fine given the data is already replicated > somewhere in another node in a very unlikely event you loose a node. I'd personally choose no more than 12 in a RAID set, but it's down to a personal level of comfort. You might also want to think about having a hot spare. > Now > in a node with more number of disk slots could create multiple Raid 5 > logical volumes, but will Gluster be smart enough to not put replicated > data on two logical volumes residing on the same node ? As I said before, this is not "smart" but is done via explicit configuration. See: http://download.gluster.com/pub/gluster/glusterfs/3.2/Documentation/AG/html/sect-Administration_Guide--Setting_Volumes-Distributed_Replicated.html Read the "Note" section highlighted in green. > I don't even consider using RAID 10 as that would be a big waste Performance, capacity, cheapness: choose any two. > Also in a medium sized cluster it > would give a good throughput when running backups for example. It depends. Backing up to a tarfile: it will likely perform well. Creating tons of individual small files: it will likely suck, especially if the backup process is single-threaded. Regards, Brian.
