On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:20 -0800, Marc Eshel wrote: > You ignored my main point, I was talking about the server side, my point > was that there is nothing to build on on the serve side since the pNFS > Linux server is not happening. > Marc. Sorry. I misunderstood your concern. As far as I know, the main problem there is also one of investment: nobody has stepped up to help Bruce write a pNFS server. I'm less worried about this now than I was earlier, because other open source efforts are gaining traction (see Ganesha - which is being sponsored by IBM, and projects such as Tigran's java based pNFS server). The other point is that we've developed client test-rigs that don't depend on the availability of a Linux server (newpynfs and the pynfs based proxy). Cheers Trond > From: > Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: > Marc Eshel <eshel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: > Peng Tao <bergwolf@xxxxxxxxx>, bhalevy@xxxxxxxxxx, Boaz Harrosh > <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Garth Gibson <garth@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Fred Isaman > <iisaman@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Matt Benjamin > <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: > 11/29/2011 04:08 PM > Subject: > Re: [PATCH 0/4] nfs41: allow layoutget at pnfs_do_multiple_writes > > > > On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 15:49 -0800, Marc Eshel wrote: > > The only 1 cent that I can add to this argument is that I was led to > > believe by you and others that Linux kernel don't add functionality on > the > > client side that is not supported on the server side. Last time I made > > this point I was told that it is ok if they are of by a version or two. > > You made it clear that this is no longer true and that the Linux client > > and server are now independent of each other. I spent time working on > the > > server side believing that the client and server will progress more or > > less together, disappointed to find out that it is not the case any > more. > > Marc. > > I don't know how to manage layout segments in a way that meets the pNFS > goals of scalability and performance, and neither you nor the pNFS spec > have told me how to do this. > > If IBM wants a client that implements layout segments, then it is _your_ > responsibility to: > A. Convince me that it is an implementable part of the spec. > B. Provide me with an implementation that deals all with the > concerns that I have. > > IOW: nobody has ever promised IBM that the community would do all your > client work for you. EMC, NetApp and Panasas have implemented (most of) > the bits that they cared about; any bits that they haven't implemented > and that you care about are up to you. > -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx www.netapp.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
