Re: [Gluster-users] Keeping it Simple replication for HA

Have you considered the disperse volume? We'd normally advocate 6 servers for a +2 redundancy factor though. Paul C On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:47 AM, wrote: > Gluster users, > > I am looking to implement GlusterFS on my network for large, expandable, > and redundant storage.

Re: [Gluster-users] Keeping it Simple replication for HA

On 09/14/2015 10:47 AM, aa...@ajserver.com wrote: simple replication that requires at least 3 of the 5 bricks have a copy of the data so I can lose any 2 bricks without data loss. This is not possible with GlusterFS, you have to specify up front which brick has which replica. I have tried

[Gluster-users] Keeping it Simple replication for HA

Gluster users, I am looking to implement GlusterFS on my network for large, expandable, and redundant storage. I have 5 servers with 1 brick each. All I want is a simple replication that requires at least 3 of the 5 bricks have a copy of the data so I can lose any 2 bricks without data loss. I