Note that we need to consider xlators on brick stack too. I've added maintainers/peers of xlators on brick stack. Please explicitly ack/nack whether this patch affects your component.
For reference, following are the xlators loaded in brick stack storage/posix features/trash features/changetimerecorder features/changelog features/bitrot-stub features/access-control features/locks features/worm features/read-only features/leases features/upcall performance/io-threads features/selinux features/marker features/barrier features/index features/quota debug/io-stats performance/decompounder protocol/server For those not following this thread, the question we need to answer is, "whether the xlator you are associated with works fine if a non-lookup fop (like open, setattr, stat etc) hits it without a lookup ever being done on that inode" regards, Raghavendra On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa <rgowd...@redhat.com> wrote: > Thanks Pranith and Ashish for your inputs. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkara...@redhat.com> > > To: "Ashish Pandey" <aspan...@redhat.com> > > Cc: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowd...@redhat.com>, "Xavier Hernandez" < > xhernan...@datalab.es>, "Gluster Devel" > > <gluster-devel@gluster.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 11:55:19 AM > > Subject: Re: Need inputs on patch #17985 > > > > Raghavendra, > > As Ashish mentioned, there aren't any known problems if upper xlators > > don't send lookups in EC at the moment. > > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Ashish Pandey <aspan...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > > Raghvendra, > > > > > > I have provided my comment on this patch. > > > I think EC will not have any issue with this approach. > > > However, I would welcome comments from Xavi and Pranith too for any > side > > > effects which I may not be able to foresee. > > > > > > Ashish > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > *From: *"Raghavendra Gowdappa" <rgowd...@redhat.com> > > > *To: *"Ashish Pandey" <aspan...@redhat.com> > > > *Cc: *"Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkara...@redhat.com>, "Xavier > Hernandez" > > > <xhernan...@datalab.es>, "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@gluster.org> > > > *Sent: *Wednesday, August 23, 2017 8:29:48 AM > > > *Subject: *Need inputs on patch #17985 > > > > > > > > > Hi Ashish, > > > > > > Following are the blockers for making a decision on whether patch [1] > can > > > be merged or not: > > > * Evaluation of dentry operations (like rename etc) in dht > > > * Whether EC works fine if a non-lookup fop (like open(dir), stat, > chmod > > > etc) hits EC without a single lookup performed on file/inode > > > > > > Can you please comment on the patch? I'll take care of dht part. > > > > > > [1] https://review.gluster.org/#/c/17985/ > > > > > > regards, > > > Raghavendra > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Pranith > > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-devel mailing list > Gluster-devel@gluster.org > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > -- > Raghavendra G > > <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel> >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel