Hacker News Reader

Comment by gamegod | Hacker News Reader

I didn't do the initial configuration myself but I wouldn't rule out this kind of gross, self-inflicted problem.

One has to wonder why the software even lets you run it with an unsafe number of nodes though... (Lots of distributed software is guilty of this...)

View on HN

Uh, well if you base your GlusterFS experience on that, no wonder you have a bad view on the technology. I can only assume that your setup only used two nodes, which is not really supported, and of course will cause split-brain problems. And two bricks, really? GlusterFS is best aimed for scale both on the server and client side, two bricks is not really scale.

There's probably a good case study to be made here on why so many people have had bad experiences with GlusterFS. If the problem is that it's too easy to set it up in a fragile way, then they need to fix that, because otherwise you're going to end up with a lot unhappy users (as you can see in the other comments).

Still, if I can't make it work well on a reasonably small scale, why would I expect it to work any better when I scale it up?

I would suggest reading the documentation and understanding the architecture. It works well for many applications but some are less ideal. Maybe yours was a corner case? I don't know. But it's used by many, for instance Facebook (https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/14x/presentations/scali...).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com