[Gluster-devel] Proposal: GlusterFS Quattro

[Anand Avati]

On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Jeff Darcy <jdarcy at redhat.com> wrote:

> As a counterpoint to the current GlusterFS proposal, I've written up a
> bunch of
> ideas that I'm collectively calling GlusterFS Quattro.  It's in Google
> Docs so
> that people can comment.  Please do.  ;)
>
> http://goo.gl/yE3O4j



Thanks for sharing this Jeff. Towards the end of my visit to the Bangalore
Red Hat office this time (from which I just returned a couple days ago) we
got to discuss the 4.x proposal from a high level (less about specifics,
more about "in general"). A concern raised by many was that if a new
release is a "too radical" (analogy given was samba4 vs samba3 -
coincidentally the same major number), it would result in way too much
confusion and overhead (e.g lots of people want to stick with 3.x as 4.x is
not yet stable, and this results in 3.x getting "stabler" and be a negative
incentive to move over to 4.x, especially when distributions/ISVs are
concerned). The conclusion was that, the 4.x proposal would be downsized to
only have the management layer changes, while the data layer (EHT, stripe
etc) changes be introduced piece by piece (as they get ready) independent
of whether the current master is for 3.x or 4.x.

Given the background, it only makes sense to retain the guiding principles
of the feedback, and reconcile the changes proposed to management layer in
the two proposals and retain the scope of 4.x to management changes.

Thoughts?
Avati
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20140307/5e642f24/attachment-0001.html>