Il 09/09/20 15:30, Miguel Mascarenhas Filipe ha scritto: I'm a noob, but IIUC this is the option giving the best performance: > 2. 1 brick per drive, Gluster "distributed replicated" volumes, no > internal redundancy Clients can write to both servers in parallel and read scattered (read performance using multiple files ~ 16x vs 2x with a single disk per host). Moreover it's easier to extend. But why ZFS instead of XFS ? In my experience it's heavier. PS: add a third host ASAP, at least for arbiter volumes (replica 3 arbiter 1). Split brain can be a real pain to fix! -- Diego Zuccato DIFA - Dip. di Fisica e Astronomia Servizi Informatici Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna V.le Berti-Pichat 6/2 - 40127 Bologna - Italy tel.: +39 051 20 95786 ________ Community Meeting Calendar: Schedule - Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968 Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
