On 08/14/2013 12:11 PM, Anand Avati wrote:
Shishir,
Is this in reference to the dht open file rebalance (of replaying the
operations to the destination server)? I am assuming so, as that is
something which has to be handled.
The other question is how should fallocate/discard be handled by
self-heal in AFR. I'm not sure how important it is, but will be
certainly good to bounce some ideas off here. Maybe we should implement
a fiemap fop to query extents/holes and replay them in the other serverl?
That is one possibility.
A few other related issues to be implemented/pondered over:
- fallocate/discard/zerofill awareness needs to be built in changelog
xlator too. fallocate/discard and zerofill in its current form are not
logged by changelog.
- With geo-replication, what should be the behaviour of
fallocate/discard on the slave? This could be similar to the guarantee
provided with self-heal.
- Impact of fallocate/discard on quota enforcement and marker accounting.
-Vijay
Avati
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Bharata B Rao <bharata.rao@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:bharata.rao@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hi Avati, Brian,
During the recently held gluster meetup, Shishir mentioned about a
potential problem (related to fd migration etc) in the zerofill
implementation (http://review.gluster.org/#/c/5327/) and also
mentioned that same/similar issues are present with fallocate and
discard implementations. Since zerofill has been modelled on
fallocate/discard, I was wondering if it would be possible to address
these issues in fallocate/discard first so that we could potentially
follow the same in zerofill implementation.
Regards,
Bharata.
--
http://raobharata.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx>
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
