Hi
I would like to see support to this DFS in future Proxmox versions!
What about it?
https://docs.lizardfs.com
---
Gilberto Nunes Ferreira
(47) 3025-5907
(47) 99676-7530 - Whatsapp / Telegram
Skype: gilberto.nunes36
___
pve-devel mailing list
pve-d
Hi Gilberto,
I took a look at their website, but didn't find any hint about why this
LizardFs would be better than currenty supported storages likes Ceph or
GlusterFS.
Did you find some use cases where this solution will be better than
currently supported ones?
Cheers
El 27/01/18 a las 1
Hi
Well... It's just seems that LizardFS (which is a MooseFS fork, I guess),
is easier to implement, very faster than GlusterFS, have metadata all save
into RAM, easier to implement compares to Ceph, there's client to Linux,
Windows and MacOS...
I am research with more benchmarks regard performanc
And just to supplement, I already had implement GlusterFS in WAN over fiber
channel and the latency was painful...
---
Gilberto Nunes Ferreira
(47) 3025-5907
(47) 99676-7530 - Whatsapp / Telegram
Skype: gilberto.nunes36
2018-01-29 9:17 GMT-02:00 Gilberto Nunes :
> Hi
>
> Well... It's just
> Well... It's just seems that LizardFS (which is a MooseFS fork, I guess),
> is easier to implement,
If I remember correctly, they run a single Master with no automatic failover?
___
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com
https://pve.proxmox.
Yes, you remember correctly. It's a paid option with their commercial
version.
On 29/01/18 14:29, Dietmar Maurer wrote:
Well... It's just seems that LizardFS (which is a MooseFS fork, I guess),
is easier to implement,
If I remember correctly, they run a single Master with no automatic failove
