> So I was a little but luck. If I has all the hardware part, probably i > would be firesd after causing data loss by using a software marked as stable Yes, we lost our data last year to this bug, and it wasn't a test cluster. We still hear from it from our clients to this day. > Is known that this feature is causing data loss and there is no evidence or > no warning in official docs. > I was (I believe) the first one to run into the bug, it happens and I knew it was a risk when installing gluster. But since then I didn't see any warnings anywhere except here, I agree with you that it should be mentionned in big bold letters on the site. Might even be worth adding a warning directly on the cli when trying to add bricks if sharding is enabled, to make sure no-one will destroy a whole cluster for a known bug. > Il 30 apr 2017 12:14 AM, <lemonnierk@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto: > > > I have to agree though, you keep acting like a customer. > > If you don't like what the developers focus on, you are free to > > try and offer a bounty to motivate someone to look at what you want, > > or even better : go and buy a license for one of gluster's commercial > > alternatives. > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:43:54PM +0200, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > > > I'm pretty sure that I'll be able to sleep well even after your block. > > > > > > Il 29 apr 2017 11:28 PM, "Joe Julian" <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ha scritto: > > > > > > > No, you proposed a wish. A feature needs described behavior, certainly > > a > > > > lot more than "it should just know what I want it to do". > > > > > > > > I'm done. You can continue to feel entitled here on the mailing list. > > I'll > > > > just set my filters to bitbucket anything from you. > > > > > > > > On 04/29/2017 01:00 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > > > > > > > > I repeat: I've just proposed a feature > > > > I'm not a C developer and I don't know gluster internals, so I can't > > > > provide details > > > > > > > > I've just asked if simplifying the add brick process is something that > > > > developers are interested to add > > > > > > > > Il 29 apr 2017 9:34 PM, "Joe Julian" <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ha > > scritto: > > > > > > > >> What I said publicly in another email ... but not to call out my > > > >> perception of your behavior publicly if also like to say: > > > >> > > > >> Acting adversarial doesn't make anybody want to help, especially not > > me > > > >> and I'm the user community's biggest proponent. > > > >> > > > >> On April 29, 2017 11:08:45 AM PDT, Gandalf Corvotempesta < > > > >> gandalf.corvotempesta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Mine was a suggestion > > > >>> Fell free to ignore was gluster users has to say and still keep going > > > >>> though your way > > > >>> > > > >>> Usually, open source project tends to follow users suggestions > > > >>> > > > >>> Il 29 apr 2017 5:32 PM, "Joe Julian" <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ha > > scritto: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Since this is an open source community project, not a company > > product, > > > >>>> feature requests like these are welcome, but would be more welcome > > with > > > >>>> either code or at least a well described method. Broad asks like > > these are > > > >>>> of little value, imho. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On 04/29/2017 07:12 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Anyway, the proposed workaround: > > > >>>>> https://joejulian.name/blog/how-to-expand-glusterfs-replicat > > > >>>>> ed-clusters-by-one-server/ > > > >>>>> won't work with just a single volume made up of 2 replicated > > bricks. > > > >>>>> If I have a replica 2 volume with server1:brick1 and > > server2:brick1, > > > >>>>> how can I add server3:brick1 ? > > > >>>>> I don't have any bricks to "replace" > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> This is something i would like to see implemented in gluster. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> 2017-04-29 16:08 GMT+02:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > > > >>>>> <gandalf.corvotempesta@xxxxxxxxx>: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> 2017-04-24 10:21 GMT+02:00 Pranith Kumar Karampuri < > > > >>>>>> pkarampu@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Are you suggesting this process to be easier through commands, > > > >>>>>>> rather than > > > >>>>>>> for administrators to figure out how to place the data? > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> [1] http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2016-July/0 > > > >>>>>>> 27431.html > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Admin should always have the ability to choose where to place > > data, > > > >>>>>> but something > > > >>>>>> easier should be added, like in any other SDS. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Something like: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> gluster volume add-brick gv0 new_brick > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> if gv0 is a replicated volume, the add-brick should automatically > > add > > > >>>>>> the new brick and rebalance data automatically, still keeping the > > > >>>>>> required redundancy level > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> In case admin would like to set a custom placement for data, it > > should > > > >>>>>> specify a "force" argument or something similiar. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> tl;dr: as default, gluster should preserve data redundancy > > allowing > > > >>>>>> users to add single bricks without having to think how to place > > data. > > > >>>>>> This will make gluster way easier to manage and much less error > > prone, > > > >>>>>> thus increasing the resiliency of the whole gluster. > > > >>>>>> after all , if you have a replicated volume, is obvious that you > > want > > > >>>>>> your data to be replicated and gluster should manage this on it's > > own. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Is this something are you planning or considering for further > > > >>>>>> implementation? > > > >>>>>> I know that lack of metadata server (this is a HUGE advantage for > > > >>>>>> gluster) means less flexibility, but as there is a manual > > workaround > > > >>>>>> for adding > > > >>>>>> single bricks, gluster should be able to handle this > > automatically. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >> -- > > > >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
