[Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Proposed Protocol changes for 4.0: Need feedback.

[Nithya Balachandran]

On 11 August 2017 at 18:04, Amar Tumballi <atumball at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Below are the proposed protocol changes (ie, XDR changes on the wire) we
> are thinking for Gluster 4.0.
>
>
>    - rchecksum/fsetattr: Add 'gfid' field on wire
>
> Basic work already done at https://review.gluster.org/#/c/3956/ .
> Considering its 5yrs old patch, I refreshed it at
> https://review.gluster.org/17656 for experimental branch, and it is all
> working fine.
>
> This patch also helps in creating new RPC program etc, so for all other
> XDR changes, we only need to handle the specific change in the patch.
>
> STATUS: GREEN
>
>    - statx() support
>
> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/273 talks more on it. We can
> consider to make XDR changes for sure even if we don't implement the fops
> in all other xlator IMO, so there won't be clients' compatibility issue.
>
> STATUS: RED  (As no work has been started yet)
>
>    - Changes to 'gf_flock' structure on wire
>
> More on it @ https://review.gluster.org/#/c/15698. Can be handled without
> this change by using xdata, but adding this field in the XDR will make it
> faster, and less error prone.
>
> STATUS: YELLOW
>
>    - Changes in few of the 'fops' to get struct iatt in _cbk
>
> This is needed for mainly handling the cases of fail over during
> rebalance, self-heal etc. Today, because we don't have a protocol support,
> our cross architecture compatibility is broken, mainly because we send iatt
> as binary in xdata dict, which is not desirable.
>

+1


> STATUS: RED
>
> (Red as we need to hear from team on what are the changes needed, and it
> would be significant change as we may have to change the fops signature
> itself).
>
>    - fadvise()
>
> As per the email thread http://lists.gluster.org/
> pipermail/gluster-devel/2017-August/053457.html, if we implement the fop,
> we would need a new XDR for it.
>
> STATUS: RED
>
> (It is red as it is still in discovery phase)
>
>    - Misc
>
> We don't have any other proposal for protocol change for now, other than a
> suggestion from Jeff Darcy about taking out the common flags we use across
> the board, inside xdata, and make them as 'flags' itself in XDR, for better
> perf, and manageability.
>
> STATUS: RED
>
> (Mainly because the work is about discovery and changing the fops
> signature itself).
>
>
> This is the good time to highlight if you need any further changes in
> protocol itself, and start towards getting it implemented and tested. I
> volunteer to review all such patches, and happy to co-ordinate it on
> experimental branch before sending them as a single patch (or multiple
> dependent, granular patches) on master when we feel it is ready.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Amar
>
>
> --
> Amar Tumballi (amarts)
>
> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers at gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20170816/fdbd02d7/attachment.html>