On 13/06/13 10:08 PM, "John Burwell" <jburw...@basho.com> wrote:
>All, > >Edison Su, Min Chen, Animesh Chaturvedi, and myself met via >teleconference on 11 June 2013 @ 1:30 PM EDT. The goal of the meeting >was determine the path forward for merging the object_store branch by the >4.2 freeze date, 30 June 2013. The conversation focused on the following >topics: > > * Staging area mechanism > * Removing dependencies from the Storage to the Hypervisor layer > * Dependencies of other patches on object_store > * QA's desire to start testing the patch ASAP > >Min, Edison, and I agreed that the staging mechanism must age out files >and use a reference count to ensure that file in-use are not prematurely >purged. While we agree that some form of reservation system is required, >Edison is concerned that it will be too conservative and create >bottlenecks. Can you please elaborate on the fact that it is too conservative - we just can't purge the files when they are still in use correct ? We can use a combination of LRU + reference count, trying to purge the LRU files if their reference count <= 0 as a start ? > >As we delved deeper into the subject of the storage to hypervisor >dependencies and the reservation mechanism, we determined that NFS >storage would still need to be the size of the secondary storage data >set. Since the hypervisor layer has not been completely fitted to the >new storage layer, NFS would be still required for a number of >operations. Based on this realization, we decided to de-scope the >staging mechanism, and leave the 4.2 object store functionality the same >as 4.1. Therefore, NFS will remain the secondary storage of record, and >object storage will serve as backup/multi-zone sync. I am not sure how we can comment its going to be the same as 4.1 - is it from the end user perspective ? The internal semantics and their flow have changed. This needs to be elaborated and properly documented. Also I am not sure if the feature is supported on the upgrade path or is it ? Need more documentation here. >In 4.3, we will fit the hypervisor layer for the new storage layer which >will allow object stores to server as secondary storage. This work will >include removing the storage to hypervisor dependencies. For 4.2, Edison >and Min have implemented the critical foundation necessary to establish >our next generation storage layer. There simply was not enough time in >this development cycle to make these changes and fit the hypervisor layer. > >Due to the size of the patch, Animesh voiced QA's concerned regarding >test scope and impact. As such, we want to get the merge completed as >soon as possible to allow testing to begin. We discussed breaking up the >patch, but we could not devise a reasonable set of chunks there were both >isolated and significantly testable. Therefore, the patch can only be >delivered in its current state. We also walked through potential >dependencies between the storage framework changes and the solidfire >branch. It was determined that these two merges could occur >independently. > >Finally, Animesh is going to setup a meeting at Citrix's Santa Clara >office on 26 June 2013 (the day after Collab ends) to discuss the path >forward for 4.3 and work through a high-level design/approach to fitting >the hypervisor layer to exploit the new storage capabilities. Details >will be published to the dev mailing list. > >Thanks, >-John > >On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:08 AM, Min Chen <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> It is 11th June. John is not free between 9:15am to 10am, that is why we >> schedule it at 10:30am. >> >> Thanks >> -min >> >> On 6/10/13 10:52 PM, "Nitin Mehta" <nitin.me...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Min, >>> When you say tomorrow, what date is it 11th June or 12th ? Can the >>>time be >>> preponed by an hour please - its too late here ? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -Nitin >>> >>> On 11/06/13 11:06 AM, "Min Chen" <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi there, >>>> >>>> To reach consensus on some remaining NFS cache issues on object_store >>>> storage refactor work in a more effective manner, John, Edison and I >>>>have >>>> scheduled a GoToMeeting tomorrow to discuss them over the phone, any >>>> interested parties are welcome to join and brainstorm. Here are >>>>detailed >>>> GTM information: >>>> >>>> Meeting Time: 10:30 AM 12:30 PM PST >>>> >>>> Meeting Details: >>>> >>>> 1. Please join my meeting. >>>> https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/188620897 >>>> >>>> 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is >>>>recommended. >>>> Or, call in using your telephone. >>>> >>>> United States: +1 (626) 521-0017 >>>> United States (toll-free): 1 877 309 2070 >>>> >>>> Access Code: 188-620-897 >>>> Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting >>>> >>>> Meeting ID: 188-620-897 >>>> >>>> GoToMeeting® >>>> Online Meetings Made Easy® >>>> >>>> Not at your computer? Click the link to join this meeting from your >>>> iPhone®, iPad® or Android® device via the GoToMeeting app. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -min >>> >> >
