-boun...@gluster.org] On Behalf Of Arnold Krille
Sent: 15 June 2012 23:10
To: gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] RAID options for Gluster
Gotta wear my BAARF-hat:
On 15.06.2012 12:14, Fernando Frediani (Qube) wrote:
Going to the idea of using RAID controllers would you think
.
Rodrigo
Fernando
-Original Message-
From: gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org [mailto:
gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org] On Behalf Of Arnold Krille
Sent: 15 June 2012 23:10
To: gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] RAID options for Gluster
Gotta wear my BAARF-hat
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 09:01:02AM +, Fernando Frediani (Qube) wrote:
Given that Gluster is not for high performance (low
latency) applications, RAID 5 seems to be a good option
Remember that low latency and high throughput are two different things.
RAID5 will give you low throughput as
is what a
single RAID logical volume where the file resides can do.
Regards,
Fernando
-Original Message-
From: Brian Candler [mailto:b.cand...@pobox.com]
Sent: 14 June 2012 14:55
To: Fernando Frediani (Qube)
Cc: 'gluster-users@gluster.org'
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] RAID options for Gluster
On 06/15/2012 06:14 AM, Fernando Frediani (Qube) wrote:
Going to the idea of using RAID controllers would you think that for say 16
disks(or 12) Raid 5 would be fine given the data is already replicated
somewhere in another node in a very unlikely event you loose a node.
If you're already
Gotta wear my BAARF-hat:
On 15.06.2012 12:14, Fernando Frediani (Qube) wrote:
Going to the idea of using RAID controllers would you think that for say 16
disks(or 12) Raid 5 would be fine given the data is already replicated
somewhere in another node in a very unlikely event you loose a
I think this discussion probably came up here already but I couldn't find much
on the archives. Would you able to comment or correct whatever might look wrong.
What options people think is more adequate to use with Gluster in terms of RAID
underneath and a good balance between cost, usable
Hi,
Some corrections...
Cons:
Extra cost of the RAID controller.
Performance of the array is equivalent a single disk + RAID controller
caching features.
RAID doesn’t scale well beyond ~16 disks
Performance of the array is not equivalent of a single disk and doesn't
depend only on cache
: gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] RAID options for Gluster
Hi,
Some corrections...
Cons:
Extra cost of the RAID controller.
Performance of the array is equivalent a single disk + RAID controller caching
features.
RAID doesn’t scale well beyond ~16 disks
Performance of the array
On 14 Jun 2012, at 15:22, Fernando Frediani (Qube)
fernando.fredi...@qubenet.net wrote:
Well, as far as I know the amount of IOPS you can get from a RAID 5/6 is the
same that you get from a single disk. The write can not be acknowledged until
it is written to all the data and parity disks.
Of Marcus Bointon
Sent: 14 June 2012 14:34
To: gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] RAID options for Gluster
On 14 Jun 2012, at 15:22, Fernando Frediani (Qube)
fernando.fredi...@qubenet.net wrote:
Well, as far as I know the amount of IOPS you can get from a RAID 5/6 is the
same
On 06/14/2012 09:33 AM, Marcus Bointon wrote:
On 14 Jun 2012, at 15:22, Fernando Frediani (Qube)
fernando.fredi...@qubenet.net wrote:
Well, as far as I know the amount of IOPS you can get from a RAID 5/6 is
the same that you get from a single disk. The write can not be
acknowledged until it
On 06/14/2012 07:06 AM, Fernando Frediani (Qube) wrote:
I think this discussion probably came up here already but I couldn’t
find much on the archives. Would you able to comment or correct whatever
might look wrong.
What options people think is more adequate to use with Gluster in terms
of RAID
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 01:21:29PM +, Fernando Frediani (Qube) wrote:
Well, as far as I know the amount of IOPS you can get from a RAID 5/6
is the same that you get from a single disk. The write can not be
acknowledged until it is written to all the data and parity disks.
Nope.
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:06:32AM +, Fernando Frediani (Qube) wrote:
No RAID (individual hot swappable disks):
Each disk is a brick individually (server:/disk1, server:/disk2, etc)
so no RAID controller is required. As the data is replicated if one
fail the data must exist
15 matches
Mail list logo
