Hello, I know this has been asked before but I felt that it wasn't fully answered and I think the situation may have changed in 3.5. I have set up geo-replication between two machines on my LAN for testing. Both are using NTP and the clocks are definitely in sync. CRAWL STATUS reports Changelog Crawl. When I make a change on the master, it takes up to a minute (sometimes less) for the slave to notice. Now I understand that geo-replication will always have some delay, not least because it is asynchronous, but given these are tiny changes with practically no other activity going on, I was expecting it to be a little more responsive. Even in production, there will very little traffic so some additional resource usage to speed things up would not be an issue. Is this configurable at all? I've seen it explained previously that inotify does not scale well and gluster has taken a more efficient approach. I hadn't expected this to come at the cost of such long delays though. We're only planning to have two nodes, a master and a slave, and I've also seen it said that gluster provides little benefit over a simple periodic call to rsync under such setups. Combine that with inotify and the rsync solution even starts to look favourable. Lowering this delay is not a deal-breaker for us, it's just that it seems unnecessarily long. I'd appreciate hearing your thoughts. Regards, James _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
