8 engineers on Hacker News describe using GlusterFS first-hand: 4 endorse it, 4 regret it, 0 are mixed.
“Distributed filesystem was probably premature here and I regret glusterfs but it's still chugging along.”
regret · personal · baobun · 2023-12-23 · source ↗ · wrong label?“Gluster was a mess, to be honest, though that was several years ago.”
regret · production · zhynn · 2017-04-21 · source ↗ · wrong label?“we chose gluster, as gce-pd doesn't support multiple writers.”
endorse · production · tzaman · 2016-12-20 · source ↗ · wrong label?“I've not had these issues with Gluster despite having Gluster volumes running many times as long.”
endorse · production · vidarh · 2016-06-01 · source ↗ · wrong label?“Apparently the bug is fixed, but we moved off gluster, never to return.”
regret · production · Rantenki · 2014-05-05 · source ↗ · wrong label?“it usually failed on high load, resulting in bad split-brains, extremely slow IO and loss of data. Very bad.”
regret · production · raggiskula · 2014-05-04 · source ↗ · wrong label?“We run hundreds of GlusterFS clusters in production on EC2. ... Overall GlusterFS has been very reliable over the years and our research has shown it is the best option out there”
endorse · production · syrneus · 2014-05-04 · source ↗ · wrong label?“For file servers we use Gluster, and it works great for us”
endorse · production · onetwothreefour · 2012-12-26 · source ↗ · wrong label?