Hello Nicolas. Thanks for your reply. As you correctly said GlusterFS is not Block Storare but it is Distributed Storage. There are scenarios where it simply doesn't apply like a Shared Block storage between physical servers in a chassis or simply shared DAS (Direct Attached Storage). Otherwise would you would unnecessarily use network throughput which can be better used for other things like VM legit traffic and not have the best performance you could reading/writing directly from/to a Shared Block Storage. Distributed storage is always a great mindset for newer scenarios, but it doesn't apply to all scenarios and I wouldn't think Redhat would direct people to a single way. Fernando On 23/11/2016 11:11, Nicolas Ecarnot wrote:
Le 23/11/2016 à 13:03, Fernando Frediani a écrit :
Has anyone managed to use GFS2 or OCFS2 for Shared Block Storage between hosts ? How scalable was it and which of the two work better ?
Using traditional CLVM is far from good starting because of the lack of Thinprovision so I'm willing to consider either of the Filesystems.
Thanks
Fernando
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Hello Fernando,
Redhat took a clear direction towards the use of GlusterFS for its Software-defined storage, and lots of efforts are made to make oVirt/RHEV work together smoothly. I know GlusterFS is not a block storage, but it's worth considering it, especially if you intend to setup hyper-converged clusters.