Hi! > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Brian Candler [mailto:B.Candler at pobox.com] > Gesendet: Freitag, 16. November 2012 09:28 > An: Martin Emrich > Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org > Betreff: Re: Avoid Split-brain and other stuff > > > That would be perfectly acceptable, as long as it would heal > > deterministically (last one wins, or renamed conflicting files) > > Not for me it wouldn't. "Last one wins" means "one set of updates thrown > away", i.e. definite data loss, which will be compounded when further > updates take place. > > Automatic renaming means either that the file vanishes from its original name > (so the application which looks for the file breaks anyway), or that one version > has the original name and the other version is renamed - which can also result > in irrepairable damage. For my use case (File server), that would be highly unlikely, and acceptable in rare cases. Of course it would be a "No-Go" for computing applications or database storage. > What you don't want is both nodes to be up, both reachable only by a subset > of clients, and updates occurring on both. Hmm, that's exactly what I want (Branch offices temporarily disconnected can continue to work), thus GlusterFS is probably not the right tool for me. Ciao Martin
