hi vidya, the main general points for me are: 1/ documentation. if gluster is not 100% posix compatible then please *dont* say that it is as it only undermines the credibility of gluster as a file-system. if we know what does and doesn't work then we can make informed decisions and work around any issues. 2/ better reporting. ie, we should be able to know which files are not replicated. right now, there's no way knowing how safe any of your data is. i'd be interested if this is even possible with the very decentralised way gluster works? 3/ NFS nlm locking & other posix compatibility issues solved. 4/ stability stability and more stability. please, no more "features" till the foundations are rock solid. i want gluster to work - but it's credibility as a "safe" file system is at issue here. what could be more important than that? ..i hope this is of use. regards, paul On 24 May 2011 11:52, Vidya Sakar <vs at gluster.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > We are planing a 3.2.1 release and we would like to hear from you all on > the specific concerns you may have about 3.2.0 stability and any bugs that > you are hitting in 3.2.0 (if they already have not been filed yet). Inputs > on 3.1.x is welcome too, please be specific on the information you provide > us. Community feedback is of paramount importance to us, please file bugs to > help us address them soon. > > Thanks, > VS > > -- > Vidya Sakar N > Senior Engineering Manager > Gluster Software India (P) Ltd > Bangalore > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20110525/780bd5fd/attachment.htm>
