Hi Rajesh, I'd thought about moving the zfs specific implementation to something like xlators/mgmt/glusterd/src/plugins/zfs-specifs-stuffs for the inital go. Could you let me know if this works or in sync with what you'd thought about? Sriram On Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 03:52 PM, sri...@marirs.net.in wrote: > Hi Rajesh, > > Sure thanks. > > Sriram > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 03:07 PM, Rajesh Joseph wrote: >> Hi Sriram, >> The interface is not yet finalized. May be this is the right time to >> re-ignite discussion on this. >> I can create an etherpad which will explain the initial thoughts and >> design ideas on the same. >> Thanks & Regards, >> Rajesh >> >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:57 PM, <sri...@marirs.net.in> wrote: >>> __ >>> Hi Rajesh, >>> >>> Could you let us know the idea on how to go about this? >>> >>> Sriram >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016, at 03:18 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: >>>> I believe Rajesh already has something here. May be he can post an >>>> outline so that we can take it from there? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 10:52 PM, <sri...@marirs.net.in> wrote: >>>>> __ >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I tried to go through the patch and find the reason behind the >>>>> question posted. But could'nt get any concrete details about the >>>>> same. >>>>> >>>>> When going through the mail chain, there were mentions of generic >>>>> snapshot interface. I'd be interested in doing the changes if you >>>>> guys could fill me with some initial information. Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Sriram >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016, at 01:59 PM, B.K.Raghuram wrote: >>>>>> Hi Rajesh, >>>>>> I did not want to respond to the question that you'd posed on the >>>>>> zfs snapshot code (about the volume backend backup) as I am not >>>>>> too familiar with the code and the person who's coded it is not >>>>>> with us anymore. This was done in bit of a hurry so it could be >>>>>> that it was just kept for later.. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, Sriram who is cc'd on this email, has been helping us by >>>>>> starting to look at the gluster code and has expressed an >>>>>> interest in taking the zfs code changes on. So he can probably >>>>>> dig out an answer to your question. Sriram, Rajesh had a question >>>>>> on one of the zfs related patches - >>>>>> (https://github.com/fractalio/glusterfs/commit/39a163eca338b6da146f72f380237abd4c671db2#commitcomment-18109851) >>>>>> >>>>>> Sriram is also interested in contributing to the process of >>>>>> creating a generic snapshot interface in the gluster code which >>>>>> you and Pranith mentioned above. If this is ok with you all, >>>>>> could you fill him in on what your thoughts are on that and how >>>>>> he could get started? >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> -Ram >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Rajesh Joseph >>>>>> <rjos...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri >>>>>>> <pkara...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> hi, >>>>>>>> Is there a plan to come up with an interface for snapshot >>>>>>>> functionality? For example, in handling different types >>>>>>>> of sockets in gluster all we need to do is to specify >>>>>>>> which interface we want to use and ib,network-socket,unix- >>>>>>>> domain sockets all implement the interface. The code >>>>>>>> doesn't have to assume anything about underlying socket >>>>>>>> type. Do you guys think it is a worthwhile effort to >>>>>>>> separate out the logic of interface and the code which >>>>>>>> uses snapshots? I see quite a few of if (strcmp ("zfs", >>>>>>>> fstype)) code which can all be removed if we do this. >>>>>>>> Giving btrfs snapshots in future will be a breeze as >>>>>>>> well, this way? All we need to do is implementing >>>>>>>> snapshot interface using btrfs snapshot commands. I am >>>>>>>> not talking about this patch per se. Just wanted to seek >>>>>>>> your inputs about future plans for ease of maintaining >>>>>>>> the feature. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As I said in my previous mail this is in plan and we will be >>>>>>> doing it. But due to other priorities this was not taken in yet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Atin Mukherjee >>>>>>>> <amukh...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 06/21/2016 11:41 AM, Rajesh Joseph wrote: >>>>>>>>> > What kind of locking issues you see? If you can provide >>>>>>>>> > some more information I can be able to help you. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That's related to stale lock issues on GlusterD which are >>>>>>>>> there in 3.6.1 since the fixes landed in the branch post >>>>>>>>> 3.6.1. I have already provided the workaround/way to fix them >>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [1]http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2016-June/thread.html#26995 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ~Atin >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org >>>>>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Pranith >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Pranith >>> > > _________________________________________________ > Gluster-devel mailing list > Gluster-devel@gluster.org > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel