On Monday 21 July 2014 13:14:46 Jeff Darcy wrote:
Perhaps it's time to revisit the idea of making assumptions about d_off
values and twiddling them back and forth, vs. maintaining a precise
mapping between our values and local-FS values.
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/4675/
That patch is
One possible solution is to convert directories into files managed by
storage/posix (some changes will also be required in dht and afr
probably). We will have full control about the format of this file,
so we'll be able to use the directory offset that we want to avoid
interferences with
On 07/21/2014 05:03 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-19 04:43, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/18/2014 07:57 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
During testing of a 3*4 gluster (from master as of yesterday), I encountered
two major weirdnesses:
1. A 'rm -rf some_dir' needed several
On 2014-07-21 13:36, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/21/2014 05:03 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-19 04:43, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/18/2014 07:57 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
During testing of a 3*4 gluster (from master as of yesterday), I
encountered
two major
On 07/21/2014 05:17 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-21 13:36, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/21/2014 05:03 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-19 04:43, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/18/2014 07:57 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
During testing of a 3*4 gluster (from master
On 2014-07-21 13:49, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/21/2014 05:17 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-21 13:36, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/21/2014 05:03 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-19 04:43, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/18/2014 07:57 PM, Anders Blomdell
On Monday 21 July 2014 13:53:19 Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-21 13:49, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/21/2014 05:17 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-21 13:36, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/21/2014 05:03 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-19 04:43, Pranith Kumar
On 07/21/2014 07:33 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-21 14:36, Soumya Koduri wrote:
On 07/21/2014 05:35 PM, Xavier Hernandez wrote:
On Monday 21 July 2014 13:53:19 Anders Blomdell wrote:
On 2014-07-21 13:49, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 07/21/2014 05:17 PM, Anders Blomdell
On 2014-07-21 19:14, Jeff Darcy wrote:
But this offset gap widens as and when more translators (which need
to store subvol-id) get added to the gluster stack which may
eventually result in the similar issue which you are facing now.
Perhaps it's time to revisit the idea of making assumptions
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri
pkara...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/18/2014 07:57 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
During testing of a 3*4 gluster (from master as of yesterday), I
encountered
two major weirdnesses:
1. A 'rm -rf some_dir' needed several invocations to
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 10:02:33AM -0400, Benjamin Turner wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri
pkara...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/18/2014 07:57 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
During testing of a 3*4 gluster (from master as of yesterday), I
encountered
two
On 07/18/2014 07:57 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
During testing of a 3*4 gluster (from master as of yesterday), I encountered
two major weirdnesses:
1. A 'rm -rf some_dir' needed several invocations to finish, each time
reporting a number of lines like these:
rm: cannot remove
On 07/18/2014 07:57 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
During testing of a 3*4 gluster (from master as of yesterday), I encountered
two major weirdnesses:
1. A 'rm -rf some_dir' needed several invocations to finish, each time
reporting a number of lines like these:
rm: cannot remove
13 matches
Mail list logo
