[Gluster-devel] Question on merging zfs snapshot support into the mainline glusterfs

[Pranith Kumar Karampuri]

I believe Rajesh already has something here. May be he can post an outline
so that we can take it from there?

On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 10:52 PM, <sriram at marirs.net.in> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I tried to go through the patch and find the reason behind the question
> posted. But could'nt get any concrete details about the same.
>
> When going through the mail chain, there were mentions of generic snapshot
> interface. I'd be interested in doing the changes if you guys could fill me
> with some initial information. Thanks.
>
> Sriram
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016, at 01:59 PM, B.K.Raghuram wrote:
>
> Hi Rajesh,
> I did not want to respond to the question that you'd posed on the zfs
> snapshot code (about the volume backend backup) as I am not too familiar
> with the code and the person who's coded it is not with us anymore. This
> was done in bit of a hurry so it could be that it was just kept for later..
>
> However, Sriram who is cc'd on this email, has been helping us by starting
> to look at the gluster code  and has expressed an interest in taking the
> zfs code changes on. So he can probably dig out an answer to your question.
> Sriram, Rajesh had a question on one of the zfs related patches - (
> https://github.com/fractalio/glusterfs/commit/39a163eca338b6da146f72f380237abd4c671db2#commitcomment-18109851
> )
>
> Sriram is also interested in contributing to the process of creating a
> generic snapshot interface in the gluster code which you and Pranith
> mentioned above. If this is ok with you all, could you fill him in on what
> your thoughts are on that and how he could get started?
> Thanks!
> -Ram
>
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Rajesh Joseph <rjoseph at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <
> pkarampu at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> hi,
>       Is there a plan to come up with an interface for snapshot
> functionality? For example, in handling different types of sockets in
> gluster all we need to do is to specify which interface we want to use and
> ib,network-socket,unix-domain sockets all implement the interface. The code
> doesn't have to assume anything about underlying socket type. Do you guys
> think it is a worthwhile effort to separate out the logic of interface and
> the code which uses snapshots? I see quite a few of if (strcmp ("zfs",
> fstype)) code which can all be removed if we do this. Giving btrfs
> snapshots in future will be a breeze as well, this way? All we need to do
> is implementing snapshot interface using btrfs snapshot commands. I am not
> talking about this patch per se. Just wanted to seek your inputs about
> future plans for ease of maintaining the feature.
>
>
>
> As I said in my previous mail this is in plan and we will be doing it. But
> due to other priorities this was not taken in yet.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 06/21/2016 11:41 AM, Rajesh Joseph wrote:
> > What kind of locking issues you see? If you can provide some more
> > information I can be able to help you.
>
> That's related to stale lock issues on GlusterD which are there in 3.6.1
> since the fixes landed in the branch post 3.6.1. I have already provided
> the workaround/way to fix them [1]
>
> [1]
> http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2016-June/thread.html#26995
>
> ~Atin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pranith
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Pranith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20160706/d317ad58/attachment.html>