Hi Alphe:
Yes Callback Filesystem is very expensive and can't open source.
It's not a good choice for ceph4win.
Another way for ceph4win maybe develop a kernel-mode fs like
pnfs. pnfs has a kernel-mode windows client. I think you can read its
src code and maybe migrating from ceph kernel client to windows kernel
fs is easier than from userspace ceph fuse client.And a kernel-mode fs
client has greater performance than userspace fs like ceph-fuse client
and ceph kernel client.
Regards.
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Alphe Salas Michels <asalas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Commercial libraries are a pain ...
>
> If we want the more permossive licence offered by callback file system we
> have to buy it for 20.000 usd. Then we will have to provide a backbox that
> we have no control upon and that will kill our product anytime they want anf
> if they decide to stop their commercial activity we will be in the same
> situation that with dokanfs but without having the source code of the black
> box. If i have to spend 20 000 dollars i would prefere paying someone to
> retake dokanfs or to write from scratch a dokanfs fuselike software make it
> all shiny and pumpy fantastic and ready to plug to ceph client.
>
> I would prefere if people have to pay something to get access to ceph4win
> that this money goes in ceph main branch pockets... Or as a gift you donante
> to ceph 10 dollars you get 2 free registration codes for ceph4win... or
> something like that.
>
> If ceph4win as to be comercial then I would prefer delegate the task to a
> company like south river technologies and their great product webdrive. I
> would mininaly get involved in that project and simply buy the final product
> to sell it together with my ceph based product (which could be a calxeda
> ceph box or something like that).
>
> I m open anyway to any proposition. But I doubt that callback filesystem
> offers us a suitable solution in the way I see ceph4win to be spread and
> used... I m maybe wrong. And anything that will be done around ceph4win will
> be public documented etc... And licensed the way that if someone want to
> build a commercial solution on top of it, that would be a possibility.
>
> My idea is to giveback somehow to ceph project and at same time forge a
> better knowledge in ceph technologies. Because like many in libre world I
> think the business is in the services around the software more than on the
> software. That the ones writing code should be financed and benefits from
> the one selling and giving support of the software at all levels. I m
> probably too idealistic. And too optimistic after all I m the one saying I
> will do this stuff I have no idea how but well it is interesting and fun so
> lets do it.
>
> Regards,
>
> P.S: using commercial backend libraries appart including their own cost will
> force you to use commercial IDE like MS VisualStudio because their library
> has some kind of drm that only that IDE compiler can use. So alot of cost
> and yet there is nothing done. If I had to open a kickstarter project saying
> we need 60 000 USD to do ceph4win with that monney we will buy the right to
> use and share a commercial copyrighted library but abandonned punctually to
> us in public domaine and that we will eventually produce something out of
> it. I doubt I will get a dollar.
>
> We still can suggest the idea to Edlos the commercial company that has the
> copyright of Callback FS, Or to buy them their product in a blender way
> (blender was bought with donation before being put opensource and public
> domaine), Or to open source their library. But in commercial minds
> opensourcing = death of their technical advantage and death of their
> marketing strategy. They will have to invent something more to retrieve
> monney from it.
>
> El nov 6, 2013 11:22 p.m., "Ketor D" <d.ketor@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:d.ketor@xxxxxxxxx>> escribió:
>
>
> Hi Alphe,
> I think you could try Callback Filesystem dev framework. It
> is a commerical dev framework and is maintained by Edlos today.
> I have communicated with Edlos to get a try code for
> development. To dokan, Callback Filesystem has vary document and maybe
> more stabilize.
>
> Regards.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Alphe Salas <asalas@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:asalas@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> > Hello ketor thank you for your interest un ceph4win. Since muy
> first mail I
> > exposed the lacks of dokanfs and that I m far from being a
> specialist un
> > filesystems.
> > I exposed what i like un dokanfs bit I not a fanátic of it. Muy
> goal is to
> > have something working quickly.
> >
> > So I am up to any proposición sure the one with the more docs and
> support
> > will be the best choice. As for right now what I need is
> understand what are
> > the files involved what are the interfaces functions and what are
> the needed
> > library dependencies and if they exist ported to windows with
> cygwin. And
> > all that is retrieved from source code.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> > El nov 6, 2013 10:34 p.m., "Ketor D" <d.ketor@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:d.ketor@xxxxxxxxx>> escribió:
>
> >
> >> Hi Alphe,
> >> We are taking an interest in your work on Ceph Client for
> Windows
> >> with Dokan.As we know, the performance of Dokan is not very
> good, and it's
> >> abandoned 3 years ago.
> >> I have learned and used OpenDedup(SDFS) for a long time.
> OpenDedup
> >> has a Dokan version. And the author of OpenDedup said
> >>
> >> The Dokan library is quite flakey and testing should be
> performed before
> >> putting into production
> >>
> >> So what do you think about this? And if there is another
> solution of
> >> fuse-like filesystem dev framwork on Windows?
> >>
> >> Best Wish!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Alphe Salas Michels
> <asalas@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:asalas@xxxxxxxxx>>
>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello I created the github repository for this project
> >>> https://github.com/alphe/Ceph4Win
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> signature
> >>>
> >>> *Alphé Salas*
> >>> Ingeniero T.I
> >>>
> >>> asalas@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:asalas@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> >>> *<http://www.kepler.cl>*
> >>>
> >>> On 11/05/13 21:00, Sage Weil wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Alphe,
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Alphe Salas Michels wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> signature *Hi, Sage !
> >>>>> thank you for you enthousiast reply.
> >>>>> I sure want to make the best use of everything or anything
> previously
> >>>>> done to
> >>>>> tend to
> >>>>> write ceph cliente for windows.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Apart using libre tools for building the future ceph cliente
> I am open
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> anything.
> >>>>> I would recommand eclipse CDT or Code::BLocks they are based
> on mingwin
> >>>>> open
> >>>>> and easyly enhanceable.**
> >>>>>
> >>>>> more free tools can be found here:
> >>>>> http://www.freebyte.com/programming/cpp/#cppcompilers
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I will read libcephfs source code and take some notes about the
> >>>>> protocol.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think you don't need to worry about hte protocol at all, since
> >>>> libcephs
> >>>> implements it for you (and will capture any future changes).
> >>>>
> >>>>> I was more going from what I know and trying to track down how
> >>>>> mount.ceph work
> >>>>> with the parameters passed to it.
> >>>>> since it point finally to Kernel/fs/ceph and that I don t really
> >>>>> understand
> >>>>> how that module work and that it probably points to some other
> >>>>> dependencies
> >>>>> Reading libcephfs source code could be a big gain of time.
> >>>>
> >>>> (I would also ignore mount.ceph as everything it does it
> specific to
> >>>> how Linux mounts work.)
> >>>>
> >>>>> basically on the protocol what is need are:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1) open and maintain a connection (socket open, auth, etc )
> >>>>> 2) retreive a map of directories and disk Quota (disk sizing
> Y TB free,
> >>>>> Z TB
> >>>>> total)
> >>>>> 3) procedure to send files / directories in a maner that it
> will allow
> >>>>> our
> >>>>> client to fit ceph transmission protocols
> >>>>> (limit bandwith for stability?, limit connection amount?,
> limit cpu
> >>>>> use?,
> >>>>> Cache for preparing data transfer (a FIFO cache)?)
> >>>>> 4)Procedure to retreive files / directory from ceph cluster
> >>>>> 5) Management copy/move files /Directories, FS stats,
> Connection Stats.
> >>>>> logging.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My idea to progress is to take those main bulletpoint in ceph
> protocol
> >>>>> based
> >>>>> on general ideas of what ceph file system does and start
> identifying
> >>>>> parts
> >>>>> from libcephfs to match those "needs".
> >>>>
> >>>> Instead, I would look at include/cephfs/libcephfs.h, the
> interface that
> >>>> libcephfs provides, and try to map that to what the fuse layer
> expects.
> >>>> There is both a path-based that I suspsect lends itself well
> to the
> >>>> Windows interface and (very soon now) a handle based API that is
> >>>> targetted
> >>>> at the Unix-style VFS layers. I'm mostly guessing, though,
> since I've
> >>>> never seen any low-level fs code in windows before.
> >>>>
> >>>> In this case, the analogous code for Linux should be
> client/fuse_ll.cc
> >>>> itself (and not much else), although there will probably be a
> few tricks
> >>>> necessary to map cleanly onto how the windows interfaces work.
> >>>>
> >>>> Does that make sense?
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers!
> >>>> sage
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Any suggestion and contributions are welcome.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *
> >>>>> On 11/05/13 11:23, Sage Weil wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Alphe,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, Alphe Salas Michels wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Good day developers!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I would like to propose to the one interested work with me to
> >>>>>>> develop a
> >>>>>>> ceph
> >>>>>>> cliente for MS windows world, Basing us on dokanFS.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> My company is a ceph enthousiast that use on a dayly basis
> ceph and
> >>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>> need
> >>>>>>> both transfer speed and big expendable and cheap storage.
> >>>>>>> My company is specialised in data recovery and we want to
> participate
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> ceph
> >>>>>>> effort by bringing a ceph cliente for windows.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Awesome!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Our experience shows us that the best gateway is each
> clientes being
> >>>>>>> its
> >>>>>>> own
> >>>>>>> gateway, instead of having a bottle neck server or a cluster of
> >>>>>>> bottle
> >>>>>>> neck
> >>>>>>> servers as gateway (FTP, samba, SFTP,webdav, s3, etc..).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We already did some research in that domain.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Dokan FS is an intent to write an opensource fuse like
> cliente for
> >>>>>>> MS
> >>>>>>> windows.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> More information on DOKANFS can be triggered here
> >>>>>>> http://dokan-dev.net/en/download/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Positive points of using DOKANFS.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> - its opensourced and well licenced mit licence, gpl
> licence and lgpl
> >>>>>>> licence.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Negative point of using DOKAN FS.
> >>>>>>> - unreachable author
> >>>>>>> - Poor documentation . Dev comments in japanese.
> >>>>>>> - Work in progress so it is unstable and needs to be updated,
> >>>>>>> debugged and
> >>>>>>> maintained by a MS Windows file system expert developper.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am not very familiar with windows storage APIs, but
> somebody told me
> >>>>>> at once point there were several interfaces against which a
> new file
> >>>>>> system could be implemented, everything from a full
> in-kernel driver
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> something that is explorer-based. Are any of those
> suitable? Using a
> >>>>>> potentially abandoned fuse-like layer makes me a bit nervous.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That said,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I try past year to do a merge from ceph-fuse to dokanfs
> >>>>>>> here are what I learnt.
> >>>>>>> - Ceph-fuse and related source code is around 60 000 lines
> of code.
> >>>>>>> - Ceph protocol isn t documented so it is like trying to
> draw a map
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>> america
> >>>>>>> using only a sextan and a compass.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Those led me to those conclusions:
> >>>>>>> - I can t do it alone.
> >>>>>>> - It is easier to draw down the ceph protocol way to work from
> >>>>>>> kernel/fs/ceph
> >>>>>>> sources and mount.ceph
> >>>>>>> - Ceph depending libraries may be unexistant or not up to
> date in
> >>>>>>> their
> >>>>>>> port
> >>>>>>> on MS Windows (cygwin)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think the most sane path should be to make libcephfs
> sufficiently
> >>>>>> portable to build on windows (or cygwin). For the bits used
> by the
> >>>>>> client-side coe, I don't think there should be much in the
> way of
> >>>>>> dependencies, and the main challenge would be untangling the
> build for
> >>>>>> the necessary pieces out from the rest of Ceph.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Have you seen the wip-port portability work that is
> currently underway
> >>>>>> by
> >>>>>> Noah and Alan? That may solve many of the cygwin problems
> you are
> >>>>>> seeing
> >>>>>> today.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> - MS file system specialist are hard do find in the "open
> source
> >>>>>>> libre
> >>>>>>> world"
> >>>>>>> so I will try in the commercial world.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The commercial world has some problems too. They need ceph
> protocol
> >>>>>>> draft
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> implemente it to their own product They will have licencing
> >>>>>>> /commercial
> >>>>>>> politics that infringe lgpl, and hide that most of the work
> is done
> >>>>>>> by
> >>>>>>> people
> >>>>>>> other than them. They will not participate in a financial
> way to ceph
> >>>>>>> enhancement and growth.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't think reimplementing the client code is an efficient way
> >>>>>> forward.
> >>>>>> Unless the goal is a pure kernel implementation...but a
> significant
> >>>>>> ongoing investment in development resources would be needed
> for that
> >>>>>> going
> >>>>>> forward. I suspect that is a challenge for a platform that
> does not
> >>>>>> typically rally that sort of community effort.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The easiest thing is of course just to use CIFS and Samba
> (which works
> >>>>>> today). A fuse-like approach is probably a reasonably
> middle ground
> >>>>>> (both
> >>>>>> in initial effort and maintainability going forward)...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> sage
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> ceph-devel" in
> >>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> >>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
