[Gluster-devel] Question on merging zfs snapshot support into the mainline glusterfs
sriram at marirs.net.in
sriram at marirs.net.in
Thu Dec 15 07:27:25 UTC 2016
Hi Avra,
Thanks for the reply,
But the problem I see here is the previous patch set sent would'nt
compile individually. So, I merged the changes into a single patch ,
which i'd posted today. Is it ok to drop all the previous posted patches
and consider from the new one? Please suggest.
Sriram
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016, at 12:45 PM, Avra Sengupta wrote:
> Hi Sriram,
>
> I have already provided comments on the new patch. It seems this new
> patch while addressing merge cloflicts, has undone some previous
> patches. I suggest you send this patch on top of the previous patchset
> (http://review.gluster.org/#/c/15554/1) instead of creating a new
> one. This will allow you to view the diff between the new version and
> the previous version, and will give u an idea if the diff is
> something that you added in the patch or got added as part of merge
> conflict.
>
> Regards,
> Avra
>
> On 12/15/2016 12:09 PM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>> Hi Avra,
>>
>> I've update the patch according to the comments below. And created a
>> single patch which does the initial modularization. Fixed the tab-
>> >space issue as well. I've raised a new review request for the same
>> bug ID here:
>> http://review.gluster.org/#/c/16138/
>>
>> Added, Rajesh and You as the reviewers, let me know if I need to do
>> anything else.
>>
>> Could you have a look and let me know?
>>
>> (Sorry for the delay in creating this)
>>
>> Sriram
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Avra Sengupta wrote:
>>> Hi Sriram,
>>>
>>> The point I was trying to make is, that we want that each patch
>>> should compile by itself, and pass regression. So for that to
>>> happen, we need to consolidate these patches(the first three) into
>>> one patch, and have the necessary make file changes into that
>>> patch too.
>>>
>>> http://review.gluster.org/#/c/15554/
>>> http://review.gluster.org/#/c/15555/
>>> http://review.gluster.org/#/c/15556/
>>>
>>> That will give us one single patch, that contains the changes of
>>> having the current code moved into separate files, and it should get
>>> compiled on it's own, and should pass regression. Also, we use
>>> spaces, and not tabs in the code. So we will need to get those
>>> changed too. Thanks.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Avra
>>>
>>> On 10/12/2016 10:46 PM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>>> Hi Avra,
>>>>
>>>> Could you let me know on the below request?
>>>>
>>>> Sriram
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016, at 11:16 AM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>>>> Hi Avra,
>>>>>
>>>>> I checked the comment, the series of patches, (There are nine
>>>>> patches) for which I've posted for a review below. They've all the
>>>>> necessary makefiles to compile.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you want me to consolidate all'em and post them as a single
>>>>> patch? (I thought that would be a little confusing, since it'd
>>>>> changes with different intentions).
>>>>>
>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016, at 03:54 PM, Avra Sengupta wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Sriram,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I posted a comment into the first patch. It doesn't compile by
>>>>>> itself. We need to update the respective makefiles to be able to
>>>>>> compile it. Then we can introduce the tabular structure in the
>>>>>> same patch to have the framework set for the zfs snapshots.
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Avra
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 09/30/2016 10:24 AM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Avra,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you have a look into the below request?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016, at 04:10 PM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Avra,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have submitted the patches for Modularizing snapshot,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1377437
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is the patch set:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15554 This patch follows the
>>>>>>>> discussion from the gluster-devel mail chain of, ...
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15555 Referring to bugID:1377437,
>>>>>>>> Modularizing snapshot for plugin based modules.
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15556 - This is third patch in the
>>>>>>>> series for the bug=1377437
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15557 [BugId:1377437][Patch4]:
>>>>>>>> Refering to the bug ID,
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15558 [BugId:1377437][Patch5]:
>>>>>>>> Refering to the bug ID,
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15559 [BugId:1377437][Patch6]:
>>>>>>>> Refering to the bug ID,
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15560 [BugId:1377437][Patch7]:
>>>>>>>> Refering to the bug ID. * This patch has some minor ...
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15561 [BugId:1377437][Patch8]:
>>>>>>>> Refering to the bug ID, this commit has minor fixes ...
>>>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/15562 [BugId:1377437][Patch9]:
>>>>>>>> Refering to the bug ID, - Minor header file ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Primarily, focused on moving lvm based implementation into
>>>>>>>> plugins. Have spread the commits across nine patches, some of
>>>>>>>> them are minors, except a couple of ones which does the real
>>>>>>>> work. Others are minors. Followed this method since, it would
>>>>>>>> be easy for a review (accept/reject). Let me know if there is
>>>>>>>> something off the methods followed with gluster devel. Thanks
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016, at 10:58 PM, Avra Sengupta wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Sriram,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have created a bug for this
>>>>>>>>> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1377437). The
>>>>>>>>> plan is that for the first patch as mentioned below, let's not
>>>>>>>>> meddle with the zfs code at all. What we are looking at is
>>>>>>>>> segregating the lvm based code as is today, from the
>>>>>>>>> management infrastructure (which is addressed in your patch),
>>>>>>>>> and creating a table based pluggable infra(refer to
>>>>>>>>> gd_svc_cli_actors[] in xlators/mgmt/glusterd/src/glusterd-
>>>>>>>>> handler.c and other similar tables in gluster code base to get
>>>>>>>>> a understanding of what I am conveying), which can be used to
>>>>>>>>> call this code and still achieve the same results as we do
>>>>>>>>> today.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Once this code is merged, we can use the same infra to start
>>>>>>>>> pushing in the zfs code (rest of your current patch). Please
>>>>>>>>> let me know if you have further queries regarding this.
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Avra
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 09/19/2016 07:52 PM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Avra,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you have a bug id for this changes? Or may I raise a new
>>>>>>>>>> one?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016, at 11:37 AM, sriram at marirs.net.in
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Avra,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'll send this patch to gluster master in a while.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016, at 03:08 PM, Avra Sengupta wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Sriram,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for the delay in response. I started going through
>>>>>>>>>>>> the commits in the github repo. I finished going through
>>>>>>>>>>>> the first commit, where you create a plugin structure and
>>>>>>>>>>>> move code. Following is the commit link:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/sriramster/glusterfs/commit/7bf157525539541ebf0aa36a380bbedb2cae5440
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> FIrst of all, the overall approach of using plugins, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining plugins that is used in the patch is in sync
>>>>>>>>>>>> with what we had discussed. There are some gaps though,
>>>>>>>>>>>> like in the zfs functions the snap brick is mounted without
>>>>>>>>>>>> updating labels, and in restore you perform a zfs rollback,
>>>>>>>>>>>> which significantly changes the behavior between how a lvm
>>>>>>>>>>>> based snapshot and a zfs based snapshot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But before we get into these details, I would request you
>>>>>>>>>>>> to kindly send this particular patch to the gluster master
>>>>>>>>>>>> branch, as that is how we formally review patches, and I
>>>>>>>>>>>> would say this particular patch in itself is ready for a
>>>>>>>>>>>> formal review. Once we straighten out the quirks in this
>>>>>>>>>>>> patch, we can significantly start moving the other
>>>>>>>>>>>> dependent patches to master and reviewing them. Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Avra
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> P.S : Adding gluster-devel
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 09/13/2016 01:14 AM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Avra,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You'd time to look into the below request?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016, at 01:20 PM, sriram at marirs.net.in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Avra,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you. Please, let me know your feedback. It would be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> helpful on continuing from then.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016, at 01:18 PM, Avra Sengupta wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Sriram,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rajesh is on a vacation, and will be available towards
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the end of next week. He will be sharing his feedback
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> once he is back. Meanwhile I will have a look at the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patch and share my feedback with you. But it will take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me some time to go through it. Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Avra
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 09/08/2016 01:09 PM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Rajesh,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry to bother. Could you have a look at the below
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> request?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016, at 11:27 AM, sriram at marirs.net.in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Rajesh,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for the delayed mail, was on leave. Could you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> let me know the feedback?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016, at 10:08 AM, Rajesh Joseph wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + Avra
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Srirram,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I was on leave therefore could not reply.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Added Avra who is also working on the snapshot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> component for review.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will take a look at your changes today.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rajesh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 1:22 PM,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <sriram at marirs.net.in> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Rajesh,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you've a look at the below request?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016, at 01:03 PM,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Rajesh,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Continuing from the discussion we've had below
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and suggestions made by you, had created a plugin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like structure (A generic plugin model) and added
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshot to be the first plugin implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you've a look if the approach is fine? I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not raised a official review request yet. Could you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give an initial review of the model?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/sriramster/glusterfs/tree/sriram_dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Things done,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Created a new folder for glusterd plugins and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> added snapshot as a plugin. Like this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $ROOT/xlators/mgmt/glusterd/plugins +
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
__ snapshot/src
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Moved LVM related snapshot implementation to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xlators/mgmt/glusterd/plugins/snapshot/src/lvm-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshot.c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Mostly isolated, glusterd code from snapshot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation by using logging, error codes and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> messages from glusterd and libglusterfs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - This way, i though we could get complete
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> isolation of snapshot plugin implementation which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> avoids most of compiler and linking dependency
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Created a library of the above like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> libgsnapshot.so and linking it with glusterd.so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get this working.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - The complete isolation also makes us to avoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reverse dependency like some api's inside
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plugin/snapshot being dependent on glusterd.so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TODO's :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Need to create glusterd_snapshot_ops structure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which would be used to register snapshot related
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> API's with glusterd.so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Add command line snapshot plugin option, so that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it picks up on compilation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - If any missed implementation for plugin.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Cleanup and get a review ready branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me know if this looks ok? Or need to any more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into the list.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016, at 02:43 PM, Rajesh Joseph
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:07 AM, Vijay Bellur
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <vbellur at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 07/19/2016 11:01 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Rajesh Joseph
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <rjoseph at redhat.com <mailto:rjoseph at redhat.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:23 AM,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <sriram at marirs.net.in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:sriram at marirs.net.in>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> __
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Rajesh,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd thought about moving the zfs specific
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation to something like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xlators/mgmt/glusterd/src/plugins/zfs-specifs-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stuffs for the inital go. Could you let me know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if this works or in sync with what you'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thought about?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sriram
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Sriram,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I was not able to send much time on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this. I would prefer you move the code to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xlators/mgmt/glusterd/plugins/src/zfs-specifs-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stuffs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about having it under xlators/mgmt/gluster-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> d/plugins/snapshot/src/zfs-specifs-stuffs such
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that in future if we have to write plugins for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other features they can be segregated?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be nicer to avoid "specific-stuff" or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> similar from the naming. We can probably leave it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xlators/mgmt/glusterd/plugins/snapshot/src/zfs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The naming would be sufficient to indicate that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code is specific to zfs snapshots.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think the directory would be named "zfs-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specific_stuffs, instead zfs specific source
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file will come directly under
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "xlators/mgmt/glusterd/plugins/snapshot/src/".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think I should have been more clear, my bad.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rajesh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>>>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________________________________
>>>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20161215/1b0b9c6f/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gluster-devel
mailing list