Is there no way to accomplish this with a simple distributed volume with
replica 2?
--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren
On 2016-02-16 23:14, Serkan Çoban wrote:
You can survive loosing 2 servers out of 5 by using disperse volumes
with 3+2 configuration. But in your case, web hosting, with lots of
small files and random read/write it is not recommended.
Maybe you can test the workload and give it a try. Other than disperse
volumes I don't know a solution that will handle failure of 2 out of 5
servers.
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Thorvald Hallvardsson
<thorvald.hallvardsson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi guys,
I need to build a backend storage for the website hosting. Storage needs to
be highly available and easily expandable. I have 5 servers with 300GB disks
for that purpose. I would like to create volume replicated with a 100GB of
size. I want the configuration which will accept 2 boxes being down at the
same time without losing any data.
Can you please suggest what is the desired configuration of the brick in
that case ?
I have seen some posts here on the group where people mentioned something
that some replica configurations works in expected - from gluster point of
view - way but unexpected - from the user point of view - where you lose one
box and the volume goes RO. I want to avoid that situation.
I also want to use FUSE driver and configure it in the way that clients will
be able to access all 5 servers at the same time.
Thank you in advance for your help.
Regards,
TH
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
