On Mon, Nov 9, 2020, 17:17 Strahil Nikolov <hunter86_bg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Alex,
I have been playing arround with the NFS Ganesha on EL8 and I was surprised that the solution deploys the cluster with a 'portblock' resource which is relying on IPTABLES, when the default is NFTABLES... Also, some selinux issues came up.
I think that Ganesha with Pacemaker integration is quite good and reliable and will ensure that your NFS clients will remain operational.
Sounds similar with how one configures iscsi with pacemaker, where one uses portblock to ease the transition of clients in the event of migration.
Also, it's worth noting that RHEL support only corosync/pacemaker setup .
I will run the all setup to make all steps clear in my mind. I was confused from the following commands which were not recognized (using Debian 10)
gluster nfs-ganesha enablegluster volume set <volname> ganesha.enable on
I might be missing some step.
Best Regards,
Strahil Nikolov
В понеделник, 9 ноември 2020 г., 10:08:44 Гринуич+2, Alex K <rightkicktech@xxxxxxxxx> написа:
Hi all,
I would like to export gluster volume (which is a replica 3) with NFS so as to use for persistent container storage. I can directly use gluster storage plugin from docker containers though it seems that this approach uses FUSE mount. I have read that nfs-ganesha i using libgfapi which provides better performance thus trying to use NFS through it.
I am just starting with nfs-ganesha and following the doc
https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/NFS-Ganesha%20GlusterFS%20Integration/
I am a bit confused with the best approach for high availability. I am already using pacemaker/corosync for other services and have a virtual IP for the cluster. I was thinking that each container can use the locally exposed NFS share (using localhost as the IP/domain of the NFS server, each container its own separate share). Reading the HA setup at the above link, it mentions the use of ganesha-ha.conf which incorporates some HA_CLUSTER_NODES etc parameters. I do not see the reason to go like that since HA is managed from gluster already. Also at same doc it mentions that this HA approach is to be replaced from storhaug which when checking at github seems like an idle repo for years. What is the best approach for HA using nf-ganesha?
Thank you,
Alex
________
Community Meeting Calendar:
Schedule -
Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC
Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
________ Community Meeting Calendar: Schedule - Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
