LVM is also good if you want to add ssd cache. It is more flexible and easier to manage and expand than bcache.
On 11 October 2017 at 04:00, Mohammed Rafi K C <rkavunga@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Volumes are aggregation of bricks, so I would consider bricks as a
unique entity here rather than volumes. Taking the constraints from the
blog [1].
* All bricks should be carved out from an independent thinly provisioned
logical volume (LV). In other words, no two brick should share a common
LV. More details about thin provisioning and thin provisioned snapshot
can be found here.
* This thinly provisioned LV should only be used for forming a brick.
* Thin pool from which the thin LVs are created should have sufficient
space and also it should have sufficient space for pool metadata.
You can refer the blog post here [1].
[1] : http://rajesh-joseph.blogspot.in/p/gluster-volume-snapshot- howto.html
Regards
Rafi KC
On 10/11/2017 01:23 PM, ML wrote:
> Thanks Rafi, that's understood now :)
>
> I'm considering to deploy gluster on a 4 x 40 TB bricks, do you think
> it would better to make 1 LVM partition for each Volume I need or to
> make one Big LVM partition and start multiple volumes on it ?
>
> We'll store mostly big files (videos) on this environement.
>
>
>
>
> Le 11/10/2017 à 09:34, Mohammed Rafi K C a écrit :
>>
>> On 10/11/2017 12:20 PM, ML wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I've read on the gluster & redhat documentation, that it seems
>>> recommended to use XFS over LVM before creating & using gluster
>>> volumes.
>>>
>>> Sources :
>>> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_ Storage/3/html/Administration_ Guide/Formatting_and_Mounting_ Bricks.html
>>>
>>>
>>> http://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Administrator% 20Guide/Setting%20Up% 20Volumes/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My point is : do we really need LVM ?
>> This recommendations was added after gluster-snapshot. Gluster snapshot
>> relays on LVM snapshot. So if you start with out lvm, in future if you
>> want to use snapshot then it would be difficult, hence the
>> recommendation to use xfs on top of lvm.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Rafi KC
>>
>>> For example , on a dedicated server with disks & partitions that will
>>> not change of size, it doesn't seems necessary to use LVM.
>>>
>>> I can't understand clearly wich partitioning strategy would be the
>>> best for "static size" hard drives :
>>>
>>> 1 LVM+XFS partition = multiple gluster volumes
>>> or 1 LVM+XFS partition = 1 gluster volume per LVM+XFS partition
>>> or 1 XFS partition = multiple gluster volumes
>>> or 1 XFS partition = 1 gluster volume per XFS partition
>>>
>>> What do you use on your servers ?
>>>
>>> Thanks for your help! :)
>>>
>>> Quentin
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
