The fault tolerance is provided by Gluster replica translator. RAID0 to me is preferable to JBOD because you get 3x read performance and 3x write performance. If performance is not a concern, or if you only have 1GbE, then it may not matter, and you could just do JBOD with a ton of bricks.
The same method scales to how ever many servers you need… imagine them in a ring… server1 A & B replica to server 2 C & D server2 A & B replica to server 3 C & D server3 A & B replica to server 1 C & D Adding a 4th server? No problem… you can move the reconfigure the bricks to do server1 A & B replica to server 2 C & D server2 A & B replica to server 3 C & D server3 A & B replica to server 4 C & D server4 A & B replica to server 1 C & D or 5 servers server1 A & B replica to server 2 C & D server2 A & B replica to server 3 C & D server3 A & B replica to server 4 C & D server4 A & B replica to server 5 C & D server5 A & B replica to server 6 C & D I guess my recommendation is not the best for redundancy and data protection… because I’m concerned with performance, and space, as long as I have 2 copies of the data on different servers then I’m happy. If you care more about performance than space, and want extra data redundancy (more than 2 copies), then use RAID 10 on the nodes, and use gluster replica. This means you have every byte of data on 4 disks. If you care more about space than performance and want extra redundancy use RAID 6, and gluster replica. I always recommend gluster replica, because several times I have lost entire servers… and its nice to have the data on more than server. > On Jul 4, 2016, at 1:46 PM, Gandalf Corvotempesta > <gandalf.corvotempe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2016-07-04 19:44 GMT+02:00 Gandalf Corvotempesta > <gandalf.corvotempe...@gmail.com>: >> So, any disk failure would me at least 6TB to be recovered via >> network. This mean an high network utilization and as long gluster >> doesn't have a dedicated network for replica, >> this can slow down client access. > > Additionally, using a RAID-0 doesn't give any fault tollerance. > My question was for archieving the bast redundancy and data proction > available. If I have to use RAID-0 that doesn't protect data, why not > removing raid at all ? _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
