Il 01/12/20 15:23, Dmitry Antipov ha scritto: > At least I can imagine the volume option to specify "let's assume that > the only live brick contains the > most recent (and so hopefully valid) data, so newly (re)started ones are > pleased to heal from it" behavior. Too dangerous and prone to byzantine desync. Say only node 1 survives, and a file gets written to it. Then, while node 2 returns to activity, node 1 dies before being able to tell node2 what changed. Another client writes to the "same" file a different content. Now node 1 returns active and you have split-brain: no version of the file is "better" than the other. A returning node 3 can't know (in an automated way) which copy of the file should be replicated. That's why you should always have a quorum of N/2+1 when data integrity is important. -- 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://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
