Thanks Rajesh,
I was looking at 3.6 only to check on some locking issues that we were seeing. However, we would like to see this in master. Please feel free to suggest modifications/modify the code as you see fit. Are there plans of having a more general way of integrating other underlying snapshotting mechanisms such as btrfs/lxd as well?On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Rajesh Joseph <rjoseph@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Kaushal M <kshlmster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Thanks for sharing this Ram!On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:38 AM, B.K.Raghuram <bkrram@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We had hosted some changes to an old version of glusterfs (3.6.1) in order
> to incorporate ZFS snapshot support for gluster snapshot commands. These
> have been done quite a while back and were not forward ported to newer
> versions of glusterfs. I have a couple of questions on this :
>
> 1. If one needs to incorporate these changes in their current or modified
> form into the glusterfs master, what is the procedure to do so?
>
> 2. Since the above process may take longer to roll in, we would like to get
> the changes into at least the latest version of the 3.6 branch. In order to
> do this, I tried the following and needed some help :
>
> I tried to apply the two ZFS relates commits
> (https://github.com/fractalio/glusterfs/commits/release-3.6) to the latest
> gluster code in the guster-3.6 branch. I hit one merge conflict per
> commit, both in xlators/mgmt/glusterd/src/glusterd-snapshot.c. The attached
> glusterd-snapshot.c_1 is the file with the merge conflicts after applying
> the first commit and glusterd-snapshot.c_2 is the one applying the second
> commit. In order to process, I removed the HEAD changes in each of the merge
> conflicts and proceeded just to see if anything else breaks but it went
> through. glusterd-snapshot.c_1_corrected and glusterd-snapshot.c_2_corrected
> and the corresponding files after removing the merge conflicts.
>
> The question I had is, are the changes that I made to correct the merge
> conflicts safe? If not, could someone provide some suggestions on how to
> correct the two conflicts?
>
> The file cmd_log contains the history of commands that I went through in the
> process..
>
Rajesh is the right person to answer your questions. As a GlusterD
maintainer, I'll go through this and see if I can answer as well.
Overall the merge resolution seems fine, except few mistakes. e.g. in glusterd-snapshot.c_2 you missedto add "(unmount == _gf_true)" in the while loop in function "glusterd_do_lvm_snapshot_remove".In function "glusterd_lvm_snapshot_remove" wrong chunk of code added. The "if" condition should break hereinstead of continuing from here.
Also I think it would be better to rebase the change against master instead of 3.6.Apart from this I am yet to review the complete change. I have taken an initial look and seems likewe do need some amount of cleanup to the code before it can be taken in. I also need to see how well it willwork the existing framework. I will go through it and provide a detailed comments later.Thanks & Regards,Rajesh
> Thanks,
> -Ram
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
