[Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Proposal to change gNFSstatus

Xie Changlong zgrep at 139.com
Fri Nov 22 06:28:14 UTC 2019


在 2019/11/22 13:39, Yaniv Kaul 写道:
>
>
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2019, 5:03 Xie Changlong <zgrep at 139.com 
> <mailto:zgrep at 139.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     在 2019/11/22 5:14, Kaleb Keithley 写道:
>>     I personally wouldn't call three years ago — when we started to
>>     deprecate it, in glusterfs-3.9 — a recent change.
>>
>>     As a community the decision was made to move to NFS-Ganesha as
>>     the preferred NFS solution, but it was agreed to keep the old
>>     code in the tree for those who wanted it. There have been plans
>>     to drop it from the community packages for most of those three
>>     years, but we didn't follow through across the board until fairly
>>     recently. Perhaps the most telling piece of data is that it's
>>     been gone from the packages in the CentOS Storage SIG in
>>     glusterfs-4.0, -4.1, -5, -6, and -7 with no complaints ever, that
>>     I can recall.
>>
>>     Ganesha is a preferable solution because it supports NFSv4,
>>     NFSv4.1, NFSv4.2, and pNFS, in addition to legacy NFSv3. More
>>     importantly, it is actively developed, maintained, and supported,
>>     both in the community and commercially. There are several vendors
>>     selling it, or support for it; and there are community packages
>>     for it for all the same distributions that Gluster packages are
>>     available for.
>>
>>     Out in the world, the default these days is NFSv4. Specifically
>>     v4.2 or v4.1 depending on how recent your linux kernel is. In the
>>     linux kernel, client mounts start negotiating for v4.2 and work
>>     down to v4.1, v4.0, and only as a last resort v3. NFSv3 client
>>     support in the linux kernel largely exists at this point only
>>     because of the large number of legacy servers still running that
>>     can't do anything higher than v3. The linux NFS developers would
>>     drop the v3 support in a heartbeat if they could.
>>
>>     IMO, providing it, and calling it maintained, only encourages
>>     people to keep using a dead end solution. Anyone in favor of
>>     bringing back NFSv2, SSHv1, or X10R4? No? I didn't think so.
>>
>>     The recent issue[1] where someone built gnfs in glusterfs-7.0 on
>>     CentOS7 strongly suggests to me that gnfs is not actually working
>>     well. Three years of no maintenance seems to have taken its toll.
>>
>>     Other people are more than welcome to build their own packages
>>     from the src.rpms and/or tarballs that are available from gluster
>>     — and support them. It's still in the source and there are no
>>     plans to remove it. (Unlike most of the other deprecated features
>>     which were recently removed in glusterfs-7.)
>>
>>
>>
>>     [1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/764
>>
>
>     It seems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1727248 has
>     resolved this issue.
>
>     Here i'll talk about something from commerical company view.  For
>     security reasons most government procurement projects only allow
>     universal storage protocol(nfs, cifs etc) what means fuse will be
>     excluded.  Consindering performance requirements, the only option
>     is nfs.
>
>
> I don't see how NFSv3 is more secure than newer NFS versions.
>

Here i mean fuse versus nfs.  Don't expect to install fuse client on 
customer's computer.


>     Nfsv4 is stateful protocol, but i see on performance improvement.
>     Trust me, nfs-ganesha(v3, v4) shows  ~30% performance degradation
>     versus gnfs  for either small or big files r/w in practice. 
>     Further, many customers prefer nfs client than cifs in windows,
>     because the poor cifs performance, AFAIK nfs-ganesha is not going
>     well with windows nfs client.
>
>
> Interesting - we've seen far better performance with Ganesha v4.1 vs. 
> gnfs.
> Would be great if you could share the details.

vdbench 6/4  random read/write


> Same for NFS Ganesha and Windows support.
>
ganesha 2.5.5,  glusterfs 3.12.2, windows server 2003. Use windows nfsv3 
mount nfs-ganesha and test read/write with vdbench50406. Following is 
crash bt

Btw, the environment has been redeployed, so i can't share more.


> It's difficult to counterpart without referring to specific issues. 
> It's eveb to harder to fix them ;-)
>
>     Gnfs is stable enough, we have about ~1000 servers, 4~24 servers
>     for a gluster cluster, about ~2000 nfs clients, all works fine
>     till the last two years expect some memleak issue.
>
>
> Nice! Would be great for the Gluster community to learn more about the 
> use case!


It's my pleasure.


> Y.
>
>     Thanks
>
>         -Xie
>
>>     On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 5:31 AM Amar Tumballi <amarts at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:amarts at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         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
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         maintainers mailing list
>>         maintainers at gluster.org <mailto:maintainers at gluster.org>
>>         https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>
>>     Community Meeting Calendar:
>>
>>     APAC Schedule -
>>     Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
>>     Bridge:https://bluejeans.com/441850968
>>
>>
>>     NA/EMEA Schedule -
>>     Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
>>     Bridge:https://bluejeans.com/441850968
>>
>>     Gluster-devel mailing list
>>     Gluster-devel at gluster.org  <mailto:Gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>>     https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     Community Meeting Calendar:
>
>     APAC Schedule -
>     Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
>     Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
>
>
>     NA/EMEA Schedule -
>     Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
>     Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
>
>     Gluster-devel mailing list
>     Gluster-devel at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>     https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20191122/75b4b169/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: nehilhidedagefho.png
Type: image/png
Size: 29338 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20191122/75b4b169/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mncknlfpefcedmbl.png
Type: image/png
Size: 198351 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20191122/75b4b169/attachment-0003.png>


More information about the maintainers mailing list