[Gluster-devel] https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/19778/

[Nithya Balachandran]

On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 08:28, Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan <atumball at redhat.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 8:04 PM Shyam Ranganathan <srangana at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/8/19 8:33 AM, Nithya Balachandran wrote:
>> > Shyam, what is your take on this?
>> > An upstream user has tried it out and reported that it seems to fix the
>> > issue , however cpu utilization doubles.
>>
>> We usually do not backport big fixes unless they are critical. My first
>> answer would be, can't this wait for rel-6 which is up next?
>>
>> Considering it may take some more time to get adoption, doing a backport
> may surely benefit users, IMO.
>
>
I agree. This is a pain point for several users and I would like to have
folks be able to try this out earlier and provide feedback.

The change has gone through a good review overall, so from a review
>> thoroughness perspective it looks good.
>>
>> The change has a test case to ensure that the limits are honored, so
>> again a plus.
>>
>> Also, it is a switch, so in the worst case moving back to unlimited
>> should be possible with little adverse effects in case the fix has issues.
>>
>> It hence, comes down to how confident are we that the change is not
>> disruptive to an existing branch? If we can answer this with resonable
>> confidence we can backport it and release it with the next 5.x update
>> release.
>>
>>
> Considering the code which the patch changes has changed very little over
> last few years, I feel it is
> totally safe to do the backport. Don't see any possible surprises. Will
> send a patch today on release-5 branch.
>
> -Amar
>
>
>
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Nithya
>> >
>> > On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 at 09:17, Amar Tumballi <atumball at redhat.com
>> > <mailto:atumball at redhat.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >     I feel its good to backport considering glusterfs-6.0 is another 2
>> >     months away.
>> >
>> >     On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 8:19 AM Nithya Balachandran
>> >     <nbalacha at redhat.com <mailto:nbalacha at redhat.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >         Hi,
>> >
>> >         Can we backport this to release-5 ? We have several reports of
>> >         high memory usage in fuse clients from users and this is likely
>> >         to help.
>> >
>> >         Regards,
>> >         Nithya
>> >         _______________________________________________
>> >         Gluster-devel mailing list
>> >         Gluster-devel at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>> >         https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >     --
>> >     Amar Tumballi (amarts)
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Gluster-devel mailing list
>> > Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> Amar Tumballi (amarts)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20190109/400dd622/attachment.html>