On 05/09/2015 01:36 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 05/09/2015 11:08 AM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
Ah! now I understood the confusion. I never said maintainer should fix
all the bugs in tests. I am only saying that they maintain tests, just
like we maintain code. Whether you
On 05/09/2015 03:19 PM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
Why not break glusterd into small parts and distribute the load to
different people? Did you guys plan anything for 4.0 for breaking glusterd?
It is going to be a maintenance hell if we don't break it sooner.
Good idea. We have thought
Oh nice, I might have missed the mails. Do you mind sharing the plan for
4.0? Any reason why you guys do not want to continue glusterd as
translator model?
I don't understand why we are using the translator model in the first place.
I guess it was to reuse rpc code. You should be able to shed
On 05/09/2015 11:08 AM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
Ah! now I understood the confusion. I never said maintainer should fix
all the bugs in tests. I am only saying that they maintain tests, just
like we maintain code. Whether you personally work on it or not, you at
least have an idea of what
Why not break glusterd into small parts and distribute the load to
different people? Did you guys plan anything for 4.0 for breaking glusterd?
It is going to be a maintenance hell if we don't break it sooner.
Good idea. We have thought about it. Just re-architecting glusterd doesn't
(and will
On 05/09/2015 02:21 PM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
On 05/09/2015 01:36 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 05/09/2015 11:08 AM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
Ah! now I understood the confusion. I never said maintainer should fix
all the bugs in tests. I am only saying that they maintain tests,
Modularising GlusterD is something we plan to do. As of now, it's
just that a plan. We don't yet have a design to achieve it yet.
What Atin mentioned and what you've mentioned seem to be the same at a
high level. The core of GlusterD will be a co-ordinating engine, which
defines an interface for
On 05/09/2015 03:04 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
Modularising GlusterD is something we plan to do. As of now, it's
just that a plan. We don't yet have a design to achieve it yet.
What Atin mentioned and what you've mentioned seem to be the same at a
high level. The core of GlusterD will be a
On 05/09/2015 04:23 PM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
Oh nice, I might have missed the mails. Do you mind sharing the plan for
4.0? Any reason why you guys do not want to continue glusterd as
translator model?
I don't understand why we are using the translator model in the first place.
I guess
