Have you done comparisons against Lustre? From what I've seen Lustre performance is 2x faster than a replicated gluster volume. On 1/4/17 5:43 PM, Lindsay Mathieson wrote: > Hi all, just wanted to mention that since I had sole use of our > cluster over the holidays and a complete set of backups :) I decided > to test some alternate cluster software and do some stress testing. > > > Stress testing involved multiple soft and *hard* resets of individual > servers and hard simultaneous resets of the entire cluster, where a > hard reset is equivalent to a power outage. > > > Gluster (3.8.7) coped perfectly - no data loss, no maintenance > required, each time it came up by itself with no hand holding and > started healing nodes, which completed very quickly. VM's on gluster > auto started with no problems, i/o load while healing was ok. I felt > quite confident in it. > > > The alternate cluster fs - not so good. Many times running VM's were > corrupted, several times I lost the entire filesystem. Also IOPS where > atrocious (fuse based). It easy to claim HA when you exclude such > things as power supply failures, dodgy network switches etc. > > > I think glusters active/active quorum based design, where is every > node is a master is a winner, active/passive systems where you have a > SPOF master are difficult to DR manage. > > > However :) Things I'd really like to see in Gluster: > > - More flexible/easier management of servers and bricks > (add/remove/replace) > > - More flexible replication rules > > One of the things I really *really* like with LizardFS is the powerful > goal system and chunkservers. Nodes and disks can be trivially easily > added/removed on the fly and chunks will be shuffled, replicated or > deleted to balance the system. Individual objects can have difference > goals (replication levels) which can also be changed on the fly and > the system will rebalance them. Objects can even be changed from/to > simple replication to Erasure Encoded objects. > > > I doubt this could be fitted to the existing gluster, but is there > potential for this sort of thing in Gluster 4.0? I read the design > docs and they look ambitious. > > > Cheers, > > _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
