Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 763746
We need an easy way to alter client configs without breaking DVM
Last modified: 2015-10-22 11:46:38 EDT
It would be tricky in this version to achieve your requirements. Even though the filesystem supports different read-subvolumes for different clients, the CLI still does not have an interface to express this configuration to the filesystem yet.
With GlusterFS 3.1, I know how you can configure an environment with 3 replicas of files, but what is not clear to me is what the proper way is to configure GlusterFS clients to use this. I know you can use mount –t glusterfs server:/volname /mntpoint to mount the volume, but what happens when you have different clients that need to mount it in a different way. For example,
1. I have 3 replicas with 1 server on each rack in a datacenter.
2. I want to have the clients in a rack read data from a server in the rack and not from the other racks.
3. Since there is no ‘vol’ file, using the above mount command all servers in all racks will read from all racks.
In 3.0.x, you would specify the read-subvolume in the mirror volume definition on the client and then mount using the vol file. Is there a way of having multiple client configurations in 3.1.x? Or do I have to copy the vol file(/etc/glusterd/vols/volname/volname-fuse.vol) to the clients and mount things that way? If I do that, will it break DVM?
Jacob Shucart | Gluster
E-Mail : Jacob@gluster.com
Direct : (408)770-1504
*** Bug 2356 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Planing to keep 3.4.x branch as "internal enhancements" release without any features. So moving these bugs to 3.4.0 target milestone.
The lack of this feature can be worked around by having 'hand-made' volume file(s) (placed in non-standard locations) per client based on the requirement. I do agree that as part of DVM, we need to provide this feature via glusterd. Lowering priority for now.
This support is coming with the "Data Classification" feature:
because of the large number of bugs filed against mainline version\ is ambiguous and about to be removed as a choice.
If you believe this is still a bug, please change the status back to NEW and choose the appropriate, applicable version for it.