Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 02, 2007 04:23:08 PM +0200 Hartmut Reuter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As I announced at the Hackathon-06 we are working on a combination of AFS
and object storage. This project was created in 2005. It was a
co-operation between Rainer Toebbicke from CERN, Andrei Maslennikov,
Ludovico Giammarino, and Roberto Belloni from CASPUR, and me from RZG.
The project has made good progress so that I would like to propose to put
the source now into the OpenAFS CVS tree.
Our source is based on the stable 1.4.4 release and can be found under
/afs/ipp-garching.mpg.de/.cs/openafs/openafs-1.4.4-osd. For all files we
changed we let the original version in place with a suffix ".orig".
There is also a doc-subdirectory with two pdf-files: one is a description
of what exists and the other one is a presentation I gave last week at
the Spring HEPIX 2007 meeting in Hamburg.
RZG is using this code already in production for normal AFS volumes, but
has enabled the use of object storage only for a few selected volumes.
The reason for not enabling object storage for all volumes is that we
don't want to make massive use of features in OpenAFS which have not yet
been approved by the OpenAFS commitees.
There is still missing a lot, but on the other hand it's time to start
beta-testing to find out all the nice bugs we have hidden under the
surface!
I suspect this is going to be way too big a change for 1.4.x. It might
be reasonable to integrate this into 1.5, but you really want to prepare
patches (using diff -ru) against the head. Patches are much easier to
read and review than is a modified source tree, and it is less likely
that a gatekeeper will screw up when applying your patch than that he
will do so when trying to manually port your changes, especially if they
are large.
Of course, you are right that this change will not go into 1.4.x, but to
have a stable reference and a base which can immediately be used in
production I always put my changes into the current stable release.
Of course the changes are large. If the gate-keepers prefer I could
create a version based on another CVS branch. But it takes a while (it's
a manual port, anyway) and I must be sure this branch doesn't change too
much in the meantime.
Which one would you suggest?
I'm sure I must have asked this during the hackathon, but does your work
require the use of new RPC numbers or new values for other protocol
fields? If so, you should send a request to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
detailing what you need new values for, so that appropriate values can
be assigned. It's actually best if you do this early, to avoid
situations where different people have used the same number for
different purposes. This is especially important because current
OpenAFS source generally does not reflect all of the numbers that have
been assigned.
I let a gap in the RPC numbers, but now I also have sent a request to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] If I would have to change the RPC numbers again
it wouldn't be a drama. We are using my code base in production, but the
new features aren't activated for normal AFS volumes and on normal AFS
clients.
In general, submitting patches to OpenAFS is not the way to modify the
AFS wire protocol. Instead, protocol changes should first be brought up
on the afs3-standardization mailing list, which is the official forum
for discussing changes to the AFS protocols. Again, it is best to bring
up proposed changes before getting too far with the implementation, to
limit the amount of wasted effort if the mailing list has objections or
suggestions for improvement.
That was the reason why I came to the Hackathon last year to inform the
AFS developers early about our project.
Hartmut
-- Jeffrey T. Hutzelman (N3NHS) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sr. Research Systems Programmer
School of Computer Science - Research Computing Facility
Carnegie Mellon University - Pittsburgh, PA
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hartmut Reuter e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone +49-89-3299-1328
RZG (Rechenzentrum Garching) fax +49-89-3299-1301
Computing Center of the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (MPG) and the
Institut fuer Plasmaphysik (IPP)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
