Hi Mauro Tridici, >From the information provided it appears like you have placed 2 bricks of a subvolume on one host. Please confirm.
The number of hosts that could go down without losing access to data can be derived based on the brick configuration/distribution. Please let us know the brick distribution plan. Regards, Sunil kumar Acharya Senior Software Engineer Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com> T: +91-8067935170 <http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/> <https://red.ht/sig> TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Mauro Tridici <mauro.trid...@cmcc.it> wrote: > Dear All, > > I just implemented a (6x(4+2)) DISTRIBUTED DISPERSED gluster (v.3.10) > volume based on the following hardware: > > - 3 gluster servers (each server with 2 CPU 10 cores, 64GB RAM, 12 hard > disk SAS 12Gb/s, 10GbE storage network) > > Now, we need to add 3 new servers with the same hardware configuration > respecting the current volume topology. > If I'm right, we will obtain a DITRIBUTED DISPERSED gluster volume with 12 > subvolumes, each volume will contain (4+2) bricks, that is a [12x(4+2)] > volume. > > My question is: in the current volume configuration, only 2 bricks per > subvolume or one host could be down without losing data. What it will > happen in the next configuration? How many hosts could be down without > losing data? > > Thank you very much. > Mauro Tridici > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users@gluster.org > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users