<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div>Okay so this is as I speculated. There would not be an automated way to do this that is already built into gluster. <br><br></div>Maybe this is really a feature request then.....<br>
<br>Wouldn't it be advantageous to be able to replicate the path through 2 servers to the same brick instead of replicating the data on the brick. The assumption being there is a HA failover path built into the hardware to the storage. <br>
<br></div>server1(M) -----> /dev/brick1 <------ server2(S)<br></div>server3(M) -----> /dev/brick2 <------ server4(S)<br><br></div>Active server nodes are server1 and server3<br></div>Slave server nodes are server2 and server4<br>
<br></div>If server1 went down server2 would take over<br><br></div>to build this volume would use syntax like:<br> <br></div><b># volume create glfs1 stripe 2 server1,server2:/dev/brick1 server3,server4:/dev/brick2<br></b><br>
</div>The point to all of this is cost savings by using active-active storage without needing to replicate data. Active-active storage is more expensive than a typical JBODs however, I wouldn't need 2 JBODs for the same space with replication thereby reducing $/GiB cost.<br>
<br></div>Thoughts? <br><div><div><br><br><br><br><br><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><br><br><br><br><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 6:08 AM, Vijay Bellur <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vbellur@redhat.com" target="_blank">vbellur@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="">On 08/20/2014 02:15 AM, Eric Horwitz wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Well the idea is to build a dual server cluster in a box using hardware<br>
meant more for Windows storage server 2012. This way we do not need to<br>
replicate data across the nodes since the 2 servers see the same block<br>
storage and you have active failover on all the hardware. Dataon has a<br>
system for this and they even suggest using gluster however, I cannot<br>
seem to figure out how to implement this model. All gluster nodes would<br>
need to be active and there doesn't seem to be a master - slave failover<br>
model. Thoughts?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
One way of doing this could be:<br>
<br>
- Both servers have to be part of the gluster trusted storage pool.<br>
<br>
- Create a distributed volume with a brick from one of the servers, say server1.<br>
<br>
- Upon server failover, replace/failover the brick by bringing in a new brick from server2. Both old and new bricks would need to refer to the same underlying block storage. I am not aware of what hooks Syncro provides to perform this failover. Brick replacement without any data migration can be achieved by:<br>
<br>
volume replace-brick <volname> <src-brick> <dst-brick> commit force<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
-Vijay<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>