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

Rajesh Joseph rjoseph at redhat.com
Mon Jun 20 09:46:53 UTC 2016

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Kaushal M <kshlmster at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:38 AM, B.K.Raghuram <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:
> > We had hosted some changes to an old version of glusterfs (3.6.1) in
> order
> > to incorporate ZFS snapshot support for gluster snapshot commands. These
> > have been done quite a while back and were not forward ported to newer
> > versions of glusterfs. I have a couple of questions on this :
> >
> > 1. If one needs to incorporate these changes in their current or modified
> > form into the glusterfs master, what is the procedure to do so?
> >
> > 2. Since the above process may take longer to roll in, we would like to
> get
> > the changes into at least the latest version of the 3.6 branch. In order
> to
> > do this, I tried the following and needed some help :
> >
> > I tried to apply the two ZFS relates commits
> > (https://github.com/fractalio/glusterfs/commits/release-3.6) to the
> latest
> > gluster code in the  guster-3.6 branch. I hit  one merge conflict per
> > commit, both in xlators/mgmt/glusterd/src/glusterd-snapshot.c. The
> attached
> > glusterd-snapshot.c_1 is the file with the merge conflicts after applying
> > the first commit and  glusterd-snapshot.c_2 is the one applying the
> second
> > commit. In order to process, I removed the HEAD changes in each of the
> merge
> > conflicts and proceeded just to see if anything else breaks but it went
> > through. glusterd-snapshot.c_1_corrected and
> glusterd-snapshot.c_2_corrected
> > and the corresponding files after removing the merge conflicts.
> >
> > The question I had is, are the changes that I made to correct the merge
> > conflicts safe? If not, could someone provide some suggestions on how to
> > correct the two conflicts?
> >
> > The file cmd_log contains the history of commands that I went through in
> the
> > process..
> >
> Thanks for sharing this Ram!
> Rajesh is the right person to answer your questions. As a GlusterD
> maintainer, I'll go through this and see if I can answer as well.
Overall the merge resolution seems fine, except few mistakes. e.g. in
glusterd-snapshot.c_2 you missed
to add "(unmount == _gf_true)" in the while loop in function

In function "glusterd_lvm_snapshot_remove" wrong chunk of code added. The
"if" condition should break here
instead of continuing from here.

Also I think it would be better to rebase the change against master instead
of 3.6.

Apart from this I am yet to review the complete change. I have taken an
initial look and seems like
we do need some amount of cleanup to the code before it can be taken in. I
also need to see how well it will
work the existing framework. I will go through it and provide a detailed
comments later.

Thanks & Regards,

> > Thanks,
> > -Ram
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20160620/0412cdfd/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-devel mailing list