On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Kaushal M <kshlms...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all, > We recently had a mailing list discussion about the current problems > with peer identification and handling multiple networks. This proposal > is regarding better identification of peers. > > Currently, the way we identify peers is not consistent all through the > gluster code. We use uuids internally and hostnames externally. This > setup works pretty well when all the peers are on a single network, > have one address, and are referred to in all the gluster commands with > same address. But once we start mixing up addresses in the commands > (ip, shortnames, fqdn) and bring in multiple networks we have > problems. > > The problems were discussed in the following mailing list threads and > some solutions were proposed. > - How do we identify peers? [1] > - RFC - "Connection Groups" concept [2] > > The solution to the multi-network problem is dependent on the solution > to the peer identification problem. So it'll be good to target fixing > the peer identification problem asap, ie. in 3.5 , and take up the > networks problem later. > > Thoughts? > Thanks for the proposal Kaushal. This is a welcome change. It will be great to have all internal identifiers for peers to happen through UUID and get translated into a host/IP at the most superficial layer. There are open issues around node crash + re-install with same IP (but new UUID) which needs to be addressed in this effort. Avati > > - Kaushal > > -- > [1] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gluster-devel/2013-06/msg00067.html > [2] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gluster-devel/2013-06/msg00069.html > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-devel mailing list > Gluster-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
