Hi,
We are going to try glusterfs for our new HA servers.
To get full HA, I'm thinking of building it this way:
+----------------+ +----------------+
| | | |
| KVM hypervisor |-----+ +-------| KVM hypervisor |
| | | | | |
+----------------+ | | +----------------+
| |
+------+
|switch|
+------+
| |
+---------------+ | | +---------------+
| | | | | |
| Glusterfs 3.3 |------+ +--------| Glusterfs 3.3 |
| server A | | server B |
| | | |
+---------------+ +---------------+
The idea is to have HA if either one KVM hypervisor or one Glusterfs
server stop working (failure, maintenance, etc).
Some points:
- We don't care much about duplicating the network (we're going to have
spare materials only).
- Glusterfs servers will use gluster replication to get HA.
- Each Glusterfs server will have SSD disks in a RAID (1 or 10, I guess).
- Most of the time, both KVM hypervisor will have VM running.
1. Is this a correct/typicall infrastructure?
2. We still didn't decide what physical network to choose between FC, FCoE
and Infiniband. What would you suggest for both performance and easy
configuration?
Is it possible to use FC or FCoE for a HA Glusterfs cluster? If so, how
to configure Glusterfs nodes?
3. Would it be better to split the Glusterfs namespace into two gluster
volumes (one for each hypervisor), each running on a Glusterfs server
(for the normal case where all servers are running)?
Thanks,
--
Nicolas Sebrecht
