> On 10 Mar 2017, at 10:33, Alessandro Briosi <ab1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Il 10/03/2017 10:28, Kevin Lemonnier ha scritto: >>> I haven't done any test yet, but I was under the impression that >>> sharding feature isn't so stable/mature yet. >>> In the remote of my mind I remember reading something about a >>> bug/situation which caused data corruption. >>> Can someone confirm that sharding is stable enough to be used in >>> production and won't cause any data loss? >> There were a few bugs yeah. I can tell you that in 3.7.15 (and I assume >> later versions) it works well as long as you don't try to add new bricks >> to your volumes (we use it in production for HA virtual machine disks). >> Apparently that bug was fixed recently, so latest versions should be >> pretty stable yeah. > > I'm using 3.8.9, so I suppose all known bugs have been fixed there (also the one with adding briks) > > I'll then proceed with some tests before going to production. I am still asking myself how such bug could happen on a clustered storage software, where adding bricks is a base feature for scalable solution, like Gluster. Or maybe is it that STM releases are really under tested compared to LTM ones ? Could we states that STM release are really not made for production, or at least really risky ? Sorry if the question could sounds a bit rude, but I think it still remains for newish peoples that had to make a choice on which release is better for production ;-) Cheers Cédric > > Thank you > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
