Re: [Gluster-users] total folder size increased
Sorry for the trouble, I clearly not in my right mind when I looked at df -h output. To my surprise there is no size increment. 2017-05-05 9:59 GMT+08:00 Umarzuki Mochlis : > Hi, > > I'm copying a web folder with total size of 109GB to a mounted volume > (locally). Now it is already 260GB and still copying. > > Is there any sizing guide so I can predict usage in the future? > > That is a ext4 formatted logical volume. > > Thanks. ___ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
[Gluster-users] total folder size increased
Hi, I'm copying a web folder with total size of 109GB to a mounted volume (locally). Now it is already 260GB and still copying. Is there any sizing guide so I can predict usage in the future? That is a ext4 formatted logical volume. Thanks. ___ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
[Gluster-users] web folder on glusterfs
Hi, I'm planning to install glusterfs on 3 nodes of Joomla 3 with nginx & php-fpm on buntu 16.04. /var/www will be used as storage volume on every node. Each node has a secondary network interface only used for mariadb cluster and glusterfs. 1G interface and 1G switch. Any pros/cons of this kind of setup? Would it be better to have a LUN shared among all nodes? I was told that to reduce a very slow "ls" command on volume with clustered filsystem, it is better that I created a raw image with diskdump, format it as ext4 and mount it. Is this the proper way for web folders? Thanks for any input and suggestions. ___ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
