문의하기

As of yesterday, my most significant patch yet became a real part of GlusterFS. It’s not a big patch, but it’s significant because what it adds is enforcement of quorum for writes. In operational terms, what this means is that – if you turn quorum enforcement on – the probability of “split brain” problems is greatly reduced. It’s not eliminated entirely, because clients don’t see failures at the same time and might take actions that lead to split brain during that immediate post-failure interval. There are also some failure conditions that can cause clients to have persistently inconsistent models of who has quorum and who doesn’t. Still, for 99% of failures this will significantly reduce the number of files affects by split brain – often down to zero. What will happen instead is that clients attempting writes (actually any modifying operation) without quorum will get EROFS instead. That might cause the application to blow up; if that’s worse for you than split brain would be, then just don’t enable quorum enforcement. Otherwise, you have the option to avoid or reduce one of the more pernicious problems that affect GlusterFS deployments with replication.

There’s another significant implication that might be of interest to those who follow my other blog. As such readers would know, I’m an active participant in the endless debates about Brewer’s CAP Conjecture (I’ve decided that Gilbert and Lynch’s later Theorem is actively harmful to understanding of the issues involved). In the past, GlusterFS has been a bit of a mess in CAP terms. It’s basically AP, in that it preserves availability and partition tolerance as I apply those terms, but with very weak conflict resolution. If only one side wrote to a file, there’s not really a conflict. When there is a conflict within a file, GlusterFS doesn’t really have the information it needs to reconstruct a consistent sequence of events, so it has to fall back on things like sizes and modification times (it does a lot better for directory changes). In a word, ick. What quorum enforcement does is turn GlusterFS into a CP system. That’s not to say I like CP better than AP – on the contrary, my long-term plan is to implement the infrastructure needed for AP replication with proper conflict resolution – but I think many will prefer the predictable and well understood CP behavior with quorum enforcement to the AP behavior that’s there now. Since it was easy enough to implement, why not give people the choice?


Red Hat logoLinkedInYouTubeFacebookTwitter

제품

체험, 구매 & 영업

커뮤니케이션

Red Hat 소개

Red Hat은 Linux, 클라우드, 컨테이너, 쿠버네티스 등을 포함한 글로벌 엔터프라이즈 오픈소스 솔루션 공급업체입니다. Red Hat은 코어 데이터센터에서 네트워크 엣지에 이르기까지 다양한 플랫폼과 환경에서 기업의 업무 편의성을 높여 주는 강화된 기능의 솔루션을 제공합니다.

Red Hat Shares 뉴스레터를 구독하세요

지금 신청하기

언어 선택