I strongly believe this is the wrong forum to discuss pro and cons of a particular offering here. Obviously no one solution fits all and every products have merits. On Tuesday, September 10, 2013, Caitlin Bestler wrote: > > I'm an architect at Nexenta. So not surprisingly I fully agree that > Gluster is a poor choice for storage in OpenStack. > > However the real question is what criteria storage vendors should be > judged by the project. These should be > clearly stated and easily verified. Once compliance is dealt with, judging > the quality of specific solutions and > their suitability to specific needs is something that the end users should > do, not the openstack project. > > The Cinder project has set minimum standards for Volume Drivers for the > Havana release. Those standards should be applied without debating their > specifics for Gluster on the mailing list. > > Storage vendors are used to dealing with certification processes. We know > how to deal with rules that state your software must do X and Y by date Z. > > I would be in full agreement, however, that OpenStack should not > accommodate an API tailored to Gluster's unique architecture. > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/**cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/** > openstack <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack> > Post to : openstack at lists.openstack.org > Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/**cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/** > openstack <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack> > -- Muralidhar Balcha 508 494 5007 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20130910/1cb6b0ff/attachment.html>