Hello,
Thank you for pointing this project, gonna try this.
The idea behind what I described, is to provide SMB shares with automatic placement based on usage pattern.
I work with large volumes, and only a fraction should have good (costly) performance. The rest can be archived.
Archiving "the old way" (I mean manually moving the files to a cold tier) is not convenient, it breaks URLs, unless someone has some tips about this.
I'm able to do the scenario described with normal Gluster nodes, some local with costly storage, some remotes with cheap storage. It's just tiering.
But I still have to manage the Linux behind the cold tier. Not interesting to me as AWS, Google or whatever can provide cheap object storage without maintenance (that means, less people in my organization to achieve the same job).
Vincent
From: gluster-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <gluster-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff <stdin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 1:32:58 PM
To: gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: GlusterFS over S3FSVincent Miszczak [2016-06-15 10:27 +0000] :
> I would like to combine Glusterfs with S3FS.
[...]
> I also have the idea to test this with Swift object storage. Advises are welcome.
Never tried this before. Maybe S3QL [1] works since it "is
a standard conforming, full featured UNIX file system that is
conceptually indistinguishable from any local file system".
1: https://bitbucket.org/nikratio/s3ql/
The entire approach sounds a bit hackish to me though. :-)
Niklaas
_______________________________________________
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
