On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Brandon Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From wiki:
> If '/mnt/sda1' is your export disk, it is nice if you export
> '/mnt/sda1/export/' through glusterfs, instead of exporting /mnt/sda1
> itself
>
> Question:
> Why?
>
I had put that thinking of the manageability
>From wiki:
If '/mnt/sda1' is your export disk, it is nice if you export
'/mnt/sda1/export/' through glusterfs, instead of exporting /mnt/sda1
itself
Question:
Why?
=P
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mai
running glusterfsd and glusterfs on the same node is definitely not a
bad practice. the nufa scheduler (to be used with the unify
translator) is written with such a scenario in mind where a group of
HPC machines export a 'piece' of the storage and all of them get a
combined shared mount.
to build
On 6/3/07, James Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
that is a good question, and how would you compile glusterfs and glusterfsd
?
On 6/3/07, Brandon Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
>
> I was wondering if there was any input on best practices of setting up
> a 2 or 3 server cluster.
>
> My questi
that is a good question, and how would you compile glusterfs and glusterfsd
?
On 6/3/07, Brandon Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was wondering if there was any input on best practices of setting up
a 2 or 3 server cluster.
My question has to do with where to run glusterfsd (server) and where
I was wondering if there was any input on best practices of setting up
a 2 or 3 server cluster.
My question has to do with where to run glusterfsd (server) and where
to run glusterfs (mounting as a client).
Should I keep the servers that are actually handling the drives and
exporting the gluster
