[Gluster-devel] Introducing a new option to gluster peer command.

[Paul Cuzner]

Yup - I guess it depends upon what we want it to return. 

If the process is a simple "are you alive"... 'ping' works. 

However, if we want more info returned - maybe detect is more self-explanatory. 

----- Original Message -----

> From: "Giuseppe Ragusa" <giuseppe.ragusa at hotmail.com>
> To: "Paul Cuzner" <pcuzner at redhat.com>, "Jay Vyas" <jayunit100 at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel at nongnu.org>
> Sent: Monday, 7 April, 2014 8:04:07 AM
> Subject: RE: [Gluster-devel] Introducing a new option to gluster peer
> command.

> Well, "peer ping" since we are giving way to imagination... :)

> Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2014 15:42:03 -0400
> From: pcuzner at redhat.com
> To: jayunit100 at gmail.com
> CC: gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Introducing a new option to gluster peer
> command.

> Sounds like a great idea.

> Although, peer sniff .... Really :)

> What about "peer detect"?

> > From: "Jay Vyas" <jayunit100 at gmail.com>
> 
> > To: "Harshavardhana" <harsha at harshavardhana.net>
> 
> > Cc: "Paul Cuzner" <pcuzner at redhat.com>, "Gluster Devel"
> > <gluster-devel at nongnu.org>
> 
> > Sent: Friday, 4 April, 2014 3:58:32 PM
> 
> > Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Introducing a new option to gluster peer
> > command.
> 

> > can i suggest that instead, we keep peer probe as is, and rewrite it to
> > call
> > two subcommands
> 

> > - peer sniff
> 
> > - peer attach
> 

> > That way users that want advanced peer sniffing can do so, without breaking
> > backwards compatibility
> 

> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Harshavardhana < harsha at harshavardhana.net
> > >
> > wrote:
> 

> > > +1 to Paul's idea - it sounds more friendly from Admin point of view -
> > 
> 
> > > also provides consistency with naming schemes.
> > 
> 

> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Paul Cuzner < pcuzner at redhat.com > wrote:
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > I like the idea of making the CLI more semantically correct. ie to drop
> > > > a
> > 
> 
> > > > node from a cluster we use the term detach, so to add a node it should
> > > > be
> > 
> 
> > > > attach.
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > Would a peer probe then be more of a diagnostic command ?
> > 
> 
> > > > - ie return whether 24007 is open, perform initial handshake -
> > > > determine
> > 
> 
> > > > gluster version and report back to the admin?
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > This would mean that you could make intelligent decisions about
> > > > bringing
> > 
> 
> > > > nodes into the cluster from the automation platform.
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > ________________________________
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > From: "Nagaprasad Sathyanarayana" < nsathyan at redhat.com >
> > 
> 
> > > > To: "James" < purpleidea at gmail.com >
> > 
> 
> > > > Cc: gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> > 
> 
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, 1 April, 2014 6:01:42 PM
> > 
> 
> > > > Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Introducing a new option to gluster peer
> > 
> 
> > > > command.
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > On 04/01/2014 08:23 AM, James wrote:
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Nagaprasad Sathyanarayana
> > 
> 
> > > > < nsathyan at redhat.com > wrote:
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > In the current design, gluster peer probe does the job of both probing
> > > > the
> > 
> 
> > > > server and adding it to trusted pool. Once the server is added to
> > > > trusted
> > 
> 
> > > > pool, it can be detached usingpeer detach command.
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > Wondering if it makes sense to bring in gluster peer attach command to
> > > > add
> > 
> 
> > > > the server to trusted pool. The peer probe command will only prove the
> > 
> 
> > > > server mentioned and tells if it is reachable. It can also be enhanced
> > > > to
> > > > do
> > 
> 
> > > > some diagnostics such as probing specific ports.
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > Do I understand correctly:
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > gluster peer attach would attach the probing server into the pool it
> > 
> 
> > > > is probing, correct?
> > 
> 
> > > > If so, and if it is already a member of a pool, could you join two
> > 
> 
> > > > different pools together?
> > 
> 
> > > > I don't know what the gluster internals implications are, but as long
> > 
> 
> > > > as I understand this correctly, then I think it would benefit the
> > 
> 
> > > > management side of glusterfs.
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > It would certainly make peering more decentralized, as long as double
> > 
> 
> > > > peering or running a simultaneous peer attach and peer probe don't
> > 
> 
> > > > cause issues. This last point is very important :)
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > Cheers,
> > 
> 
> > > > James
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > The "gluster peer attach" should work the same way as existing "gluster
> > > > peer
> > 
> 
> > > > probe". The new "gluster peer probe" shall only probe the peer and not
> > > > add
> > 
> 
> > > > it to the trusted pool. When we give peer detach option, I think it
> > > > would
> > 
> 
> > > > be natural to expect a peer attach command.
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > Thanks
> > 
> 
> > > > Naga
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > 
> 
> > > > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > 
> 
> > > > Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> > 
> 
> > > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > 
> 
> > > > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > 
> 
> > > > Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> > 
> 
> > > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> > 
> 
> > > >
> > 
> 

> > > --
> > 
> 
> > > Religious confuse piety with mere ritual, the virtuous confuse
> > 
> 
> > > regulation with outcomes
> > 
> 

> > > _______________________________________________
> > 
> 
> > > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > 
> 
> > > Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> > 
> 
> > > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> > 
> 

> > --
> 
> > Jay Vyas
> 
> > http://jayunit100.blogspot.com
> 

> _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20140406/09a061e3/attachment-0001.html>