<div dir="ltr">Hi Nguyen,<div><br></div><div>We also have fixed using 3.2.7 for production - it works well for us.</div><div><br></div><div>I was thinking to upgrade to 3.4.x in the next month or so. I'd like to understand more - how many people are actually using 3.4.1? Can anyone (users) or from gluster/redhat chime in here - would be reassuring to hear that the latest version is also the greatest..</div>
<div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Paul</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 2 December 2013 15:52, Nguyen Viet Cuong <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mrcuongnv@gmail.com" target="_blank">mrcuongnv@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi,<div><br></div><div>Actually, I have very bad experience with GlusterFS 3.3.x and 3.4.x under very high pressure (> 64 processes write in parallel in more than 10 minutes, for example). GlusterFS 3.2.7 from EPEL is really stable and we use it for production.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Unfortunately, there is no official built of GlusterFS 3.2.x on Gluster's repo.</div><div><br></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div>