Re: Need inputs on patch #17985

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Raghavendra,
    As Ashish mentioned, there aren't any known problems if upper xlators don't send lookups in EC at the moment.

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Ashish Pandey <aspandey@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Raghvendra,

I have provided my comment on this patch.
I think EC will not have any issue with this approach.
However, I would welcome comments from Xavi and Pranith too for any side effects which I may not be able to foresee.

Ashish


From: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Ashish Pandey" <aspandey@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkarampu@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Xavier Hernandez" <xhernandez@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 8:29:48 AM
Subject: Need inputs on patch #17985


Hi Ashish,

Following are the blockers for making a decision on whether patch [1] can be merged or not:
* Evaluation of dentry operations (like rename etc) in dht
* Whether EC works fine if a non-lookup fop (like open(dir), stat, chmod etc) hits EC without a single lookup performed on file/inode

Can you please comment on the patch? I'll take care of dht part.

[1] https://review.gluster.org/#/c/17985/

regards,
Raghavendra




--
Pranith
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Users]     [Ceph Users]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux