[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-4904?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17297521#comment-17297521
]
Arpit Agarwal commented on HDDS-4904:
-------------------------------------
Thanks [~elek]. Yes, that will be an improvement. I would also like it if we
called it a prototype, since no production solution for CSI can be based on
goofys. They call it a filey system not file system :)
{quote}It's a Filey System instead of a File System because goofys strives for
performance first and POSIX second. Particularly things that are difficult to
support on S3 or would translate into more than one round-trip would either
fail (random writes) or faked (no per-file permission). Goofys does not have an
on disk data cache (checkout [catfs|https://github.com/kahing/catfs]), and
consistency model is close-to-open.
{quote}
> Remove mention of CSI support
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: HDDS-4904
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-4904
> Project: Apache Ozone
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Arpit Agarwal
> Priority: Critical
>
> The Ozone website prominently mentions CSI support:
> [https://ozone.apache.org/docs/1.0.0/]
> [https://ozone.apache.org/docs/1.0.0/interface/csi.html]
> Our docs give a false impression to users that CSI is fully functional and
> supported for persistent storage inside containers.
> This support uses goofys+S3 gateway, so it is not appropriate for any serious
> usage. A real CSI solution should use an approach like the cBlocks prototype
> by building directly on top of HDDS containers with a real device driver.
> Until that time we should not claim CSI support. Alternatively we should be
> honest with our users that it is a prototype and not suitable for serious
> usage.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
