From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Apr 19 08:44:05 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3C568CE
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 08:44:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.ultra-secure.de (mail.ultra-secure.de [88.198.178.88])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0B181C0B
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 08:44:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 97006 invoked by uid 89); 19 Apr 2014 08:44:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.207?)
 (rainer@ultra-secure.de@217.71.83.52)
 by mail.ultra-secure.de with ESMTPA; 19 Apr 2014 08:44:01 -0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
Subject: Re: What happened with the GlusterFS port?
From: Rainer Duffner <rainer@ultra-secure.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAKYr3zybY3hdXLpL-fCvqs+=syZ7uBE-FiXj+XcRGG1YoUZhOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:43:58 +0200
Message-Id: <7FAD7618-593D-4797-9EE9-BA36A87CE79B@ultra-secure.de>
References: <28234312-7982-49F5-83FD-865649AA9CCB@ultra-secure.de>
 <1397850220.58880.16.camel@powernoodle.corp.yahoo.com>
 <CAKYr3zybY3hdXLpL-fCvqs+=syZ7uBE-FiXj+XcRGG1YoUZhOQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17
Cc: FreeBSD FS <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 08:44:05 -0000


Am 18.04.2014 um 21:51 schrieb Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com>:

>=20
>=20
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Sean Bruno <sbruno@ignoranthack.me> =
wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-18 at 21:30 +0200, Rainer Duffner wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > does anybody know where the effort to port GluserFS to FreeBSD went?
> >
> > There=92s this (very) outdated wiki-page:
> > https://wiki.freebsd.org/GlusterFS
> >
> > and there=92s the SoC project:
> > https://wiki.freebsd.org/SummerOfCode2013/GlusterFSport
> >
> > But nothing seems to have happened after it was finished.
>=20
>=20
> The port made decent progress over the GSOC period, but no, it never
> gained any traction to end up in the ports collection.
>=20
>=20


That is very unfortunate.



> not to hijack the thread but, glusters ancient, use riak-cs, or swift, =
or port leofs
> =20
>=20


Currently, the unavailability of GlusterFS in FreeBSD (vs. the =
availability in Linux) is sort of a deal-breaker for some projects here.

There are, regrettably, a large number of legacy applications the rely =
on a traditional filesystem.
An equally large number of customers continue to rely on these same =
applications, for the foreseeable future (and they pay us to run the =
stuff).
Traditionally, I would have just suggested a ZFS NFS fileserver - but it =
adds a single point of failure, manual failover with ZFS sends/HAST etc.

GlusterFS would eliminate this (in situations where the customer needs a =
number of servers anyway).

I guess, it won=92t happen until somebody is paid to do it (SoC sort of =
proofed that) - directly or indirectly.