[Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Backport for "Add back socket for polling of events immediately..."
raghavendra at gluster.com
Mon May 29 03:16:11 UTC 2017
Replying to all queries here:
* Is it a bug or performance enhancement?
Its a performance enhancement. No functionality is broken if this patch
is not taken in.
* Are there performance numbers to validate the claim?
* Are there any existing users who need this enhancement?
Though not sure what branch Zhang Huan is on. @Zhang your inputs are
* Do I think this patch _should_ go into any of the released branches?
Personally, I don't feel strongly either way. I am fine with this patch
not making into any of released branches. But, I do think there are users
who are affected with this (Especially EC/Disperse configurations). If they
want to stick to the released branches, pulling into released branches will
help them. @Pranith/Xavi, what are your opinions on this?
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Shyam <srangana at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/28/2017 09:24 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
>> On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com
>> <mailto:ndevos at redhat.com>> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 12:25:42PM -0400, Shyam wrote:
>> > Or this one: https://review.gluster.org/15036 <
>> > This is backported to 3.8/10 and 3.11 and considering the size and
>> impact of
>> > the change, I wanted to be sure that we are going to accept this
>> across all
>> > 3 releases?
>> > @Du, would like your thoughts on this.
>> > @niels, @kaushal, @talur, as release owners, could you weigh in as
>> > please.
>> > I am thinking that we get this into 3.11.1 if there is agreement,
>> and not in
>> > 3.11.0 as we are finalizing the release in 3 days, and this change
>> > big, to get in at this time.
>> Given 3.11 is going to be a new release, I'd recommend to get this fix
>> in (if we have time). https://review.gluster.org/#/c/17402/ is dependent
>> on this one.
> It is not a fix Atin, it is a more fundamental change to request
> processing, with 2 days to the release, you want me to merge this?
> Is there a *bug* that will surface without this change or is it a
> performance enhancement?
>> > Further the change is actually an enhancement, and provides
>> > benefits, so it is valid as a change itself, but I feel it is too
>> late to
>> > add to the current 3.11 release.
>> Indeed, and mostly we do not merge enhancements that are non-trivial
>> stable branches. Each change that we backport introduces the chance on
>> regressions for users with their unknown (and possibly awkward)
>> The patch itself looks ok, but it is difficult to predict how the
>> affects current deployments. I prefer to be conservative and not have
>> this merged in 3.8, at least for now. Are there any statistics in how
>> performance is affected with this change? Having features like this
>> in newer versions might also convince users to upgrade sooner, 3.8
>> only be supported until 3.12 (or 4.0) gets released, which is approx.
>> months from now according to our schedule.
>> maintainers mailing list
>> maintainers at gluster.org <mailto:maintainers at gluster.org>
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gluster-devel