[Discuss] Gluster startup, small-files performance

[ozbek at gmx.com (F. O. Ozbek)]

On 05/14/2014 01:45 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
> F. O. Ozbek wrote:
>> I think the discussion is losing its focus. If you are a bank
>> moving billions of dollars around, go make EMC even richer.
>> If you need a reliable HPC storage cluster that you can actually afford,
>> use moosefs!
>
> That's been my point: MooseFS isn't reliable. Parallel clusters will
> have overlapping sync cycles which reduces, but does not eliminate, the
> windows during which no data or partial data has been flushed to disk.
> More parallel clusters means smaller windows but you still can't be 100%
> certain 100% of the time.
>
> This is getting to be a lot like that "MongoDB is Web Scale" video.
> "GluserFS is slow because it writes to disk." :)
>
> But seriously, in a purely compute environment where data on the shared
> file system are replicated from other sources, MooseFS may be a good
> choice. But as a primary data store? No chance.
>

We have been told by the glusterfs developers in the past
that "they don't store their important data" on glusterfs, yet,
somehow you seem to claim
that glusterfs is more reliable than moosefs ?!?

I mean, come on, look at the claim you are making:
" MooseFS isn't reliable", have you ever done any tests?
Well, we have done tests, and a lot of them, at the time
we have done the tests, glusterfs started giving random I/O
errors under heavy load. We will get errors messages about
files not being there and on random files as well.
At the same tests, we have received no errors from moosefs.
It takes some serious Chutzpah to make the general claim
you are making which is "MooseFS isn't reliable".

The fact is moosefs is pretty much rock solid. This thread started
by someone asking for an advice on an alternative for glusterfs
which I have provided. and look at the state of discussion
it has taken us! We make our living providing reliable storage,
we have done extensive tests, at the time we have done the tests,
moosefs was far better than glusterfs (reliability and performance.)
Is glusterfs not worth testing again? No, we will probably test
the latest version again. (The same way we keep on testing
other solutions.)

Fevzi