[Gluster-users] Fwd: Proposal to change gNFS status

Thu Nov 21 11:28:34 UTC 2019

Hi Markus,

Looks like your email got bounced as you were not member of the list. I got
the email as I had you in Cc earlier (through the github communications).

Forwarding it to the list so everyone gets your email.

Also, Yaniv, about the 'name' *Odd Fixes, *I am not a big fan either, but
out of the existing options in MAINTAINERS file, that was best suited. If
we have to change the name, *'Maintained, but no enhancements' * would give
very clear messaging IMO. Happy to hear what people think.

-Amar

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Markus Seywald <max at beeksfx.com>
Date: Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 4:48 PM
Subject: RE: Proposal to change gNFS status

Hi Everyone,

Just an Feedback from 1 User End.

We used GNFS with NFS3 now since  some years.  The 3.12.15 have some Bugs,…
but it’s running most stable in comparisons to older Versions.

NFS-Ganesha we where not able to get it stable since Years. NFS-Ganesha is
very instable once its getting used with VMware (6.0/6.7). Instable in such
Way making it unusable. Even 2.8.x. The Idea of using NFS4.1 with Vmware
was an great Mind,……. But never worked so far. Vmware just support “Session
Trunking” and not pnfs in general. They don’t support using non Vsan,
binded to open-source community. I’am not sure how other Hypervisor works
with,……

Also I think there is a big Complication once it comes to Issues once 2
Open-Source Products are in use. Once an Issue appears and not clear what
ever End is the root Cause,…………… could be an extensive Process to get a Fix
for.

So looking forward, on my End I really would appreciate if GNFS would be as
a Default Package part of Gluster. As it’s the most simple Way providing
Peoples an easy NFS Solution.  Glusterfs as a Client is not supported or
available for each OS. It would be good providing “Fixes” once there are
Bugs with newer Glusterfs Versions with GNFS in use (like #764,#765).

Also I would be more then happy if Devs would also deep Focus support
Matrix with Hypervisors and to make it stable for most common ones like
Vmware. May Hyper-V/KVM as well. (nfs-ganesha, gluster,..)

Reason why I’am thinking this Way from User-End is following:

Markets are moving very very fast. Everything need to get more stable, more
efficient and flexible with the tiniest Effort possible. This means as well
based on Costs > Reason why Open-Source getting more and more interesting
in Total. Changing Products causing opposite Situation. Biggest Kickback is
once Products getting changed. Leading to Risks Use Cases not working
anymore or if lots Bugs/Issues arise.  That can happen with Fully Payed
Products as well > but there is then a big Support Channel behind.

Top Leader in Virtualization Sector also focusing Kubernetes and combining
Stacks for easier usages.

So I think it would be really really good if gluster and NFS-ganesha
getting also fully adopted for the Virtualization Solutions.  As this World
is changing more and more into this Layers. And more Activities into this
Direction we see in the Future.

I understand this is may just some Words from 1 user,…. But may some others
thinking Similar.

Appreciated and Thx for Reading.

Max

*From:* Amar Tumballi <amarts at gmail.com>
*Sent:* Donnerstag, 21. November 2019 11:31
*To:* GlusterFS Maintainers <maintainers at gluster.org>
*Cc:* Gluster Devel <gluster-devel at gluster.org>; Gluster users maillist <
Gluster-users at gluster.org>; xiechanglong.d <xiechanglong.d at gmail.com>
*Subject:* Proposal to change gNFS status

Hi All,

As per the discussion on https://review.gluster.org/23645, recently we
changed the status of gNFS (gluster's native NFSv3 support) feature to
'Depricated / Orphan' state. (ref:
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L185..L189).
With this email, I am proposing to change the status again to 'Odd Fixes'
(ref: https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L22)

TL;DR;

I understand the current maintainers are not able to focus on maintaining
it as the focus of the project, as earlier described, is keeping
NFS-Ganesha based integration with glusterfs. But, I am volunteering along
with Xie Changlong (currently working at Chinamobile), to keep the feature
running as it used to in previous versions. Hence the status of 'Odd
Fixes'.

Before sending the patch to make these changes, I am proposing it here now,
as gNFS is not even shipped with latest glusterfs-7.0 releases. I have
heard from some users that it was working great for them with earlier
releases, as all they wanted was NFS v3 support, and not much of features
from gNFS. Also note that, even though the packages are not built, none of
the regression tests using gNFS are stopped with latest master, so it is
working same from at least last 2 years.

I request the package maintainers to please add '--with gnfs' (or
--enable-gnfs) back to their release script through this email, so those
users wanting to use gNFS happily can continue to use it. Also points to
users/admins is that, the status is 'Odd Fixes', so don't expect any
'enhancements' on the features provided by gNFS.

Happy to hear feedback, if any.

Regards,

Amar

Privacy Notice: If you are receiving this email it is because you have
given us your email address or we have a legitimate business
interest with your organisation. Beeks Financial Cloud will not retain any
of your personal information without lawful reason to do so.
You have the right to request that we remove your email address and other
personal details at any time.
Read our full Data Protection Policy
<https://www.beeksfinancialcloud.com/data-protection-policy/> and Privacy
Notice <https://www.beeksfinancialcloud.com/privacy-notice/>.
Beeks Financial Cloud Group plc is incorporated in Scotland with
registration number SC521839 and registered office at Lumina Building, 40
Ainslie Road, Ground Floor, Hillington Park, Glasgow, G52 4RU, United
Kingdom.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20191121/dba34887/attachment.html>