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

[Atin Mukherjee]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Rajesh Joseph <rjoseph at redhat.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:23 AM, <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/glusterd/plugins/snapshot/src/zfs-specifs-stuffs such that in
future if we have to write plugins for other features they can be
segregated?


> atinm and others do let us know if you have any objection to this.
>
> I captured our initial discussions on an etherpad (
> https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-volume-snapshots). I will update it
> further, meanwhile you can also
> capture more details in the etherpad if needed.
>
> Best Regards,
> Rajesh
>
>
>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 03:52 PM, sriram at marirs.net.in wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rajesh,
>>
>> Sure thanks.
>>
>> Sriram
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 03:07 PM, Rajesh Joseph wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sriram,
>> The interface is not yet finalized. May be this is the right time to
>> re-ignite discussion on this.
>> I can create an etherpad which will explain the initial thoughts and
>> design ideas on the same.
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Rajesh
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:57 PM, <sriram at marirs.net.in> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Rajesh,
>>
>> Could you let us know the idea on how to go about this?
>>
>> Sriram
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016, at 03:18 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *_______________________________________________*
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 

--Atin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20160719/4e95399d/attachment-0001.html>