On 09/05/2014 03:51 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
GlusterD performs the following functions as the management daemon for
GlusterFS:
- Peer membership management
- Maintains consistency of configuration data across nodes
(distributed configuration store)
- Distributed command execution (orchestration)
- Service management (manage GlusterFS daemons)
- Portmap service for GlusterFS daemons
This proposal aims to delegate the above functions to technologies
that solve these problems well. We aim to do this in a phased manner.
The technology alternatives we would be looking for should have the
following properties,
- Open source
- Vibrant community
- Good documentation
- Easy to deploy/manage
This would allow GlusterD's architecture to be more modular. We also
aim to make GlusterD's architecture as transparent and observable as
possible. Separating out these functions would allow us to do that.
Bulk of current GlusterD code deals with keeping the configuration of
the cluster and the volumes in it consistent and available across the
nodes. The current algorithm is not scalable (N^2 in no. of nodes)
and doesn't prevent split-brain of configuration. This is the problem
area we are targeting for the first phase.
As part of the first phase, we aim to delegate the distributed
configuration store. We are exploring consul [1] as a replacement for
the existing distributed configuration store (sum total of
/var/lib/glusterd/* across all nodes). Consul provides distributed
configuration store which is consistent and partition tolerant. By
moving all Gluster related configuration information into consul we
could avoid split-brain situations.
Did you get a chance to go over the following questions while making the
decision? If yes could you please share the info.
What are the consistency guarantees for changing the configuration in
case of network partitions?
specifically when there are 2 nodes and 1 of them is not reachable?
consistency guarantees when there are more than 2 nodes?
What are the consistency guarantees for reading configuration in case of
network partitions?
Pranith
All development efforts towards this proposal would happen in parallel
to the existing GlusterD code base. The existing code base would be
actively maintained until GlusterD-2.0 is production-ready.
This is in alignment with the GlusterFS Quattro proposals on making
GlusterFS scalable and easy to deploy. This is the first phase ground
work towards that goal.
Questions and suggestions are welcome.
~kaushal
[1] : http://www.consul.io/
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users