Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Proposing to previous ganesha HA cluster solution back to gluster code as gluster-7 feature

2019-07-18 Thread Renaud Fortier 
IMO, you should keep storhaug and maintain it. At the beginning, we were with 
pacemaker and corosync. Then we move to storhaug with the upgrade to gluster 
4.1.x. Now you are talking about going back like it was. Maybe it will be 
better with pacemake and corosync but the important is to have a solution that 
will be stable and maintained.

thanks
Renaud

De : gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org 
[mailto:gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org] De la part de Jim Kinney
Envoyé : 30 avril 2019 08:20
À : gluster-us...@gluster.org; Jiffin Tony Thottan ; 
gluster-us...@gluster.org; Gluster Devel ; 
gluster-maintain...@gluster.org; nfs-ganesha ; 
de...@lists.nfs-ganesha.org
Objet : Re: [Gluster-users] Proposing to previous ganesha HA cluster solution 
back to gluster code as gluster-7 feature

+1!
I'm using nfs-ganesha in my next upgrade so my client systems can use NFS 
instead of fuse mounts. Having an integrated, designed in process to coordinate 
multiple nodes into an HA cluster will very welcome.
On April 30, 2019 3:20:11 AM EDT, Jiffin Tony Thottan 
mailto:jthot...@redhat.com>> wrote:

Hi all,

Some of you folks may be familiar with HA solution provided for nfs-ganesha by 
gluster using pacemaker and corosync.

That feature was removed in glusterfs 3.10 in favour for common HA project 
"Storhaug". Even Storhaug was not progressed

much from last two years and current development is in halt state, hence 
planning to restore old HA ganesha solution back

to gluster code repository with some improvement and targetting for next 
gluster release 7.

I have opened up an issue [1] with details and posted initial set of patches [2]

Please share your thoughts on the same

Regards,

Jiffin

[1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/663

[2] https://review.gluster.org/#/q/topic:rfc-663+(status:open+OR+status:merged)

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. All tyopes are thumb related and 
reflect authenticity.
___

Community Meeting Calendar:

APAC Schedule -
Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/836554017

NA/EMEA Schedule -
Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/486278655

Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Proposing to previous ganesha HA cluster solution back to gluster code as gluster-7 feature

2019-07-18 Thread Jim Kinney 
+1!
I'm using nfs-ganesha in my next upgrade so my client systems can use NFS 
instead of fuse mounts. Having an integrated, designed in process to coordinate 
multiple nodes into an HA cluster will very welcome.

On April 30, 2019 3:20:11 AM EDT, Jiffin Tony Thottan  
wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Some of you folks may be familiar with HA solution provided for 
>nfs-ganesha by gluster using pacemaker and corosync.
>
>That feature was removed in glusterfs 3.10 in favour for common HA 
>project "Storhaug". Even Storhaug was not progressed
>
>much from last two years and current development is in halt state,
>hence 
>planning to restore old HA ganesha solution back
>
>to gluster code repository with some improvement and targetting for
>next 
>gluster release 7.
>
>I have opened up an issue [1] with details and posted initial set of 
>patches [2]
>
>Please share your thoughts on the same
>
>Regards,
>
>Jiffin
>
>[1]https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/663 
>
>
>[2] 
>https://review.gluster.org/#/q/topic:rfc-663+(status:open+OR+status:merged)

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. All tyopes are thumb related and 
reflect authenticity.___

Community Meeting Calendar:

APAC Schedule -
Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/836554017

NA/EMEA Schedule -
Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/486278655

Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Proposing to previous ganesha HA cluster solution back to gluster code as gluster-7 feature

2019-05-02 Thread Jiffin Tony Thottan 


On 30/04/19 6:41 PM, Renaud Fortier wrote:


IMO, you should keep storhaug and maintain it. At the beginning, we 
were with pacemaker and corosync. Then we move to storhaug with the 
upgrade to gluster 4.1.x. Now you are talking about going back like it 
was. Maybe it will be better with pacemake and corosync but the 
important is to have a solution that will be stable and maintained.




I agree it is very frustrating, there is no longer development planned 
for future unless someone pick it and work on for its stabilization and 
improvement.


My plan is just to get back what gluster and nfs-ganesha had before

--

Jiffin


thanks

Renaud

*De :*gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org 
[mailto:gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org] *De la part de* Jim Kinney

*Envoyé :* 30 avril 2019 08:20
*À :* gluster-us...@gluster.org; Jiffin Tony Thottan 
; gluster-us...@gluster.org; Gluster Devel 
; gluster-maintain...@gluster.org; 
nfs-ganesha ; de...@lists.nfs-ganesha.org
*Objet :* Re: [Gluster-users] Proposing to previous ganesha HA cluster 
solution back to gluster code as gluster-7 feature


+1!
I'm using nfs-ganesha in my next upgrade so my client systems can use 
NFS instead of fuse mounts. Having an integrated, designed in process 
to coordinate multiple nodes into an HA cluster will very welcome.


On April 30, 2019 3:20:11 AM EDT, Jiffin Tony Thottan 
mailto:jthot...@redhat.com>> wrote:


Hi all,

Some of you folks may be familiar with HA solution provided for
nfs-ganesha by gluster using pacemaker and corosync.

That feature was removed in glusterfs 3.10 in favour for common HA
project "Storhaug". Even Storhaug was not progressed

much from last two years and current development is in halt state,
hence planning to restore old HA ganesha solution back

to gluster code repository with some improvement and targetting
for next gluster release 7.

I have opened up an issue [1] with details and posted initial set
of patches [2]

Please share your thoughts on the same

Regards,

Jiffin

[1]https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/663


[2]
https://review.gluster.org/#/q/topic:rfc-663+(status:open+OR+status:merged)


--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. All tyopes are thumb 
related and reflect authenticity.


___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel