<div>The data will not be in "any" state as you mention or please define what you mean by "any". In the worst case you will just loose 5 seconds of data that's all as far as I understand. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Here is another very interesting but long post regarding this topic. Basically it all boils down to this specific<br></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block-empty"><br></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block protonmail_signature_block-empty"><div class="protonmail_signature_block-user protonmail_signature_block-empty"><div><br></div></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block-proton protonmail_signature_block-empty"><br></div></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block-empty"><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="protonmail_quote" type="cite"><div>-------- Original Message --------<br></div><div>Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Production cluster planning<br></div><div>Local Time: September 30, 2016 12:41 PM<br></div><div>UTC Time: September 30, 2016 10:41 AM<br></div><div>From: lindsay.mathieson@gmail.com<br></div><div>To: mabi <mabi@protonmail.ch>, Gluster Users <gluster-users@gluster.org><br></div><div><br></div><div>On 29/09/2016 4:32 AM, mabi wrote:<br></div><div>
> hat's not correct. There is no risk of corruption using <br></div><div>
> "sync=disabled". In the worst case you just end up with old data but <br></div><div>
> no corruption. See the following comment from a master of ZFS (Aaron <br></div><div>
> Toponce):<br></div><div>
><br></div><div>
> https://pthree.org/2013/01/25/glusterfs-linked-list-topology/#comment-227906<br></div><div>
<br></div><div>
Your missing what he said - *ZFS* will not be corrupted but the data <br></div><div>
written could be in any state, in this case the gluster filesystem data <br></div><div>
and meta data. To have one ndoe in a cluster out of sync with out the <br></div><div>
cluster knowing would be very bad.<br></div><div>
<br></div><div>
-- <br></div><div>
Lindsay Mathieson<br></div><div>
<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div>