[Gluster-devel] Need inputs on patch #17985

[Raghavendra G]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Nithya Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com>
wrote:

> It has been a while but iirc snapview client (loaded abt dht/tier etc) had
> some issues when we ran tiering tests. Rafi might have more info on this -
> basically it was expecting to find the inode_ctx populated but it was not.
>

Thanks Nithya. @Rafi, @Raghavendra Bhat, is it possible to take the
ownership of,

* Identifying whether the patch in question causes the issue?
* Send a fix or at least evaluate whether a fix is possible.

@Others,

With the motivation of getting some traction on this, Is it ok if we:
* Set a deadline of around 15 days to complete the review (or testing with
the patch in question) of respective components and to come up with issues
(if any).
* Post the deadline, if there are no open issues, go ahead and merge the
patch?

If time is not enough, let us know and we can come up with a reasonable
time.

regards,
Raghavendra


> On 24 August 2017 at 10:13, Raghavendra G <raghavendra.hg at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Note that we need to consider xlators on brick stack too. I've added
>> maintainers/peers of xlators on brick stack. Please explicitly ack/nack
>> whether this patch affects your component.
>>
>> For reference, following are the xlators loaded in brick stack
>>
>> storage/posix
>> features/trash
>> features/changetimerecorder
>> features/changelog
>> features/bitrot-stub
>> features/access-control
>> features/locks
>> features/worm
>> features/read-only
>> features/leases
>> features/upcall
>> performance/io-threads
>> features/selinux
>> features/marker
>> features/barrier
>> features/index
>> features/quota
>> debug/io-stats
>> performance/decompounder
>> protocol/server
>>
>>
>> For those not following this thread, the question we need to answer is,
>> "whether the xlator you are associated with works fine if a non-lookup
>> fop (like open, setattr, stat etc) hits it without a lookup ever being done
>> on that inode"
>>
>> regards,
>> Raghavendra
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa <
>> rgowdapp at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Pranith and Ashish for your inputs.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> > From: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkarampu at redhat.com>
>>> > To: "Ashish Pandey" <aspandey at redhat.com>
>>> > Cc: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp at redhat.com>, "Xavier Hernandez" <
>>> xhernandez at datalab.es>, "Gluster Devel"
>>> > <gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 11:55:19 AM
>>> > Subject: Re: Need inputs on patch #17985
>>> >
>>> > Raghavendra,
>>> >     As Ashish mentioned, there aren't any known problems if upper
>>> xlators
>>> > don't send lookups in EC at the moment.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Ashish Pandey <aspandey at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Raghvendra,
>>> > >
>>> > > I have provided my comment on this patch.
>>> > > I think EC will not have any issue with this approach.
>>> > > However, I would welcome comments from Xavi and Pranith too for any
>>> side
>>> > > effects which I may not be able to foresee.
>>> > >
>>> > > Ashish
>>> > >
>>> > > ------------------------------
>>> > > *From: *"Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp at redhat.com>
>>> > > *To: *"Ashish Pandey" <aspandey at redhat.com>
>>> > > *Cc: *"Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkarampu at redhat.com>, "Xavier
>>> Hernandez"
>>> > > <xhernandez at datalab.es>, "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>>> > > *Sent: *Wednesday, August 23, 2017 8:29:48 AM
>>> > > *Subject: *Need inputs on patch #17985
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Hi Ashish,
>>> > >
>>> > > Following are the blockers for making a decision on whether patch
>>> [1] can
>>> > > be merged or not:
>>> > > * Evaluation of dentry operations (like rename etc) in dht
>>> > > * Whether EC works fine if a non-lookup fop (like open(dir), stat,
>>> chmod
>>> > > etc) hits EC without a single lookup performed on file/inode
>>> > >
>>> > > Can you please comment on the patch? I'll take care of dht part.
>>> > >
>>> > > [1] https://review.gluster.org/#/c/17985/
>>> > >
>>> > > regards,
>>> > > Raghavendra
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Pranith
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>
>>> --
>>> Raghavendra G
>>>
>>> <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>
>
>


-- 
Raghavendra G
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20170829/6ebe63ed/attachment.html>