Il 06/11/2016 13:28, David Gossage ha scritto:
I'm really sorry. I've mixed RAID1 with RAIDZ1 that means RAID5. Sorry for that. Let's talk about 'standard raids': I mean RAID1 I'm trying to say that the current Lindsay solution could be better (AFAIK): Instead of using a single RAID10, where in case of a "mirror" failure you have to resync the whole node from the network (24TB in my example), a RAID1 solution (with 6 RAID1) is better. In case you loose a mirror, you have to resync only that mirror from network because. Instead of having a plain replicated setup: server1:brick1, server2:brick1, server3:brick1 you'll have: server1:brick1, server2:brick1, server3:brick1 server1:brick2, server2:brick2, server3:brick2 server1:brick3, server2:brick3, server3:brick3 In a distributed replicated setup. Each brick is a RAID1 mirror. The aggregation like a RAID-0 is made by gluster |
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users