----- Original Message ----- > From: "Raghavendra G" <raghavendra.hg@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp@xxxxxxxxxx>, anoopcs@xxxxxxxxxx, "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, > raghavendra@xxxxxxxxxx > Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 8:52:28 AM > Subject: Re: Need inputs on patch #17985 > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Nithya Balachandran <nbalacha@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > It has been a while but iirc snapview client (loaded abt dht/tier etc) had > > some issues when we ran tiering tests. Rafi might have more info on this - > > basically it was expecting to find the inode_ctx populated but it was not. > > > > Thanks Nithya. @Rafi, @Raghavendra Bhat, is it possible to take the > ownership of, > > * Identifying whether the patch in question causes the issue? gf_svc_readdirp_cbk is setting relevant state in inode [1]. I quickly checked whether its the same state stored by gf_svc_lookup_cbk and it looks like the same state. So, I guess readdirp is handled correctly by snapview-client and an explicit lookup is not required. But, will wait for inputs from rabhat and rafi. [1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/xlators/features/snapview-client/src/snapview-client.c#L1962 > * Send a fix or at least evaluate whether a fix is possible. > > @Others, > > With the motivation of getting some traction on this, Is it ok if we: > * Set a deadline of around 15 days to complete the review (or testing with > the patch in question) of respective components and to come up with issues > (if any). > * Post the deadline, if there are no open issues, go ahead and merge the > patch? > > If time is not enough, let us know and we can come up with a reasonable > time. > > regards, > Raghavendra > > > > On 24 August 2017 at 10:13, Raghavendra G <raghavendra.hg@xxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > >> Note that we need to consider xlators on brick stack too. I've added > >> maintainers/peers of xlators on brick stack. Please explicitly ack/nack > >> whether this patch affects your component. > >> > >> For reference, following are the xlators loaded in brick stack > >> > >> storage/posix > >> features/trash > >> features/changetimerecorder > >> features/changelog > >> features/bitrot-stub > >> features/access-control > >> features/locks > >> features/worm > >> features/read-only > >> features/leases > >> features/upcall > >> performance/io-threads > >> features/selinux > >> features/marker > >> features/barrier > >> features/index > >> features/quota > >> debug/io-stats > >> performance/decompounder > >> protocol/server > >> > >> > >> For those not following this thread, the question we need to answer is, > >> "whether the xlator you are associated with works fine if a non-lookup > >> fop (like open, setattr, stat etc) hits it without a lookup ever being > >> done > >> on that inode" > >> > >> regards, > >> Raghavendra > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa < > >> rgowdapp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>> Thanks Pranith and Ashish for your inputs. > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> > From: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkarampu@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > To: "Ashish Pandey" <aspandey@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > Cc: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowdapp@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Xavier Hernandez" < > >>> xhernandez@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Gluster Devel" > >>> > <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 11:55:19 AM > >>> > Subject: Re: Need inputs on patch #17985 > >>> > > >>> > 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 > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Raghavendra G > >>> > >>> <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel> > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gluster-devel mailing list > >> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx > >> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > >> > > > > > > > -- > Raghavendra G > _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
