2016-10-27 0:14 GMT+02:00 Joe Julian <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > For now I can say that gluster performs better and has a much better > worst-case resolution. If everything else goes to hell, I have disks with > files on them that I can recover on a laptop if I have to. Totally agree. > Of course when you ask the Inktank consultants (now Red Hat) about "What > happens when it fails?" the answer is "It doesn't fail." Well guess what... It doesn't fail? There was a recent HUGE outage in DreamHost cluster, some days ago. It took (if i remember properly 2 days to fix, and this was dreamhost, not a "normal" company) There was another huge outage some weeks ago, as seen on ceph ML. Is not the first time that I see ceph clusters totally down or with huge corruption (LevelDB corrupted and so on) So, it fails, like any other software. As I always say, having the file untouched and easily recoverable (without shards, you can simply run "rsync", with shard you run rsync+some script to mege each chunk) is the real value added, when everything is gonna bad. _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
