<div dir="ltr">Hey Vijay,<div><br></div><div>Thanks for the response.</div><div><br></div><div>OSE 3.1, due to be released late fall, is supposed to formally support Gluster for persistent storage. Right now Gluster support is offered as a technology preview. We're not planning on running any CPU or network intensive applications on OSE, at least not yet. I've seen a few of the write ups on Gluster and Docker, however, many of them seem to be about running<b><i> Gluster in a Docker container</i></b> which is just mind blowing to me. :) </div><div><br></div><div>I suppose we should simply try Gluster as the backend for OSE v3.0 and see how it goes. We're not planning on launching OSE v3 in production just yet. Sadly, we've had slow internal adoption of OSE v2.2. Developers seem to have 99 problems and deployment/hosting isn't one of them.</div><div><br></div><div>But are there any performance benchmarks pitting NFS v4 vs Gluster client 3.7.x?</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Ryan</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Vijay Bellur <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vbellur@redhat.com" target="_blank">vbellur@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Sunday 06 September 2015 07:34 AM, Ryan Nix wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hello,<br>
<br>
We're evaluating OpenShift v3, which uses Docker. The manual recommends<br>
using NFS v4 for storage. I would much prefer to use Gluster's native<br>
client instead of NFS, mainly because the Gluster client is so easy to<br>
use. One of our Redhat SEs says it is probably fine to use Gluster<br>
instead of NFS v4 for now until OpenShift gets formal support for<br>
Gluster in OpenShift 3.1. I asked him why Gluster wasn't initially<br>
supported and he said it probably came down to not having enough time to<br>
test thoroughly before OSE's release.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
Hi Ryan - I checked internally with the corresponding Red Hat teams and got a similar response. Lack of time is the core reason for going ahead with NFS. You can follow up with your Red Hat representatives to ensure that support for fuse lands in a subsequent OSE release.<span class=""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Does anyone have any experience with running Docker images with Gluster<br>
using the Gluster client? Is it possible that Redhat's recommendation is<br>
based on the performance of NFS v4 vs Gluster?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
No performance numbers have been gathered with fuse client in OSE and hence the question of comparison does not arise. What applications/workloads do you intend running in OSE?<span class=""><br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I can't seem to find<br>
anything that says one is faster than the other. Has anyone used Gluster<br>
with Docker (which powers OpenShift)?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
There have been various write ups on the web about using Gluster and Docker. I would be very interested if someone on this list has direct experience with this combination.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Vijay<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>