Il 2021-08-03 19:51 Strahil Nikolov ha scritto:
The difference between thin and usual arbiter is that the thin arbiter takes in action only when it's needed (one of the data bricks is down) , so the thin arbiter's lattency won't affect you as long as both data bricks are running. Keep in mind that thin arbiter is less used. For example, I have never deployed a thin arbiter.
Maybe I am horribly wrong, but local-node reads should *not* involve other nodes in any manner - ie: no checksum or voting is done for read. AFR hashing should spread different files to different nodes when doing striping, but for mirroring any node should have a valid copy of the requested data.
So when using choose-local all reads which can really be local (ie: the requested file is available) should not suffer from remote party latency.
Is that correct? Thanks. -- Danti Gionatan Supporto Tecnico Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it email: g.danti@xxxxxxxxxx - info@xxxxxxxxxx GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8 ________ 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
