5 ms·
a) Project was created in 2012 so these statements may have been made around the time when the most popular DFS was HDFS and GCP was brand new. b) It does have
by threeseed 6y ago
a) Project was created in 2012 so these statements may have been made around the time when the most popular DFS was HDFS and GCP was brand new.
b) It does have redundancy through data replication unless I am missing something ?
- fh973 6y agoa) I wonder in which sense HDFS was ever the most popular DFS. You could argue that it is not even a DFS, because it is not a general purpose / POSIX file system. In 2012 there was Lustre, GlusterFS, GPFS, ... Not many DFS were built since 2012. b) It is completely unclear how the replication works, and which properties it has (split-brain safe?). From what it states (see citation), the "repair" is not automatic.
- chrislusf 6y agoa) you are right. I was not in storage field. b) During writes, the strong consistency is required. The repair is by admin scripts, not by the data node themselves. This is to keep data nodes simple and scalable. You can also run the repair scripts at the "safe" time.
- q3k 6y agoFor a distributed filesystem's redundancy to be working in my book, it has to actually be able to reconstruct itself after unavailability/failure, which Seaweed seemingly doesn't do. Additionally, something more complex than N-replication (eg. M.N erasure coding) is also a strong 'redundancy working' requirement for me.