[Gluster-devel] Question on merging zfs snapshot support into the mainline glusterfs
sriram at marirs.net.in
sriram at marirs.net.in
Fri Sep 30 04:54:50 UTC 2016
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/glusterd/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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20160930/c25ab3fa/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gluster-devel
mailing list