Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] GF_CALLOC to GF_MALLOC conversion - is it safe?

2019-03-21 Thread Nithya Balachandran
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 21:14, Yaniv Kaul wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:23 PM Nithya Balachandran > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 16:16, Atin Mukherjee wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> In the last few releases of glusterfs, with stability as a primary theme >>> of the releases,

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] GF_CALLOC to GF_MALLOC conversion - is it safe?

2019-03-21 Thread Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:24 PM Yaniv Kaul wrote: >> Smallfile is part of CI? I am happy to see it documented @ >> https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Performance%20Testing/#smallfile-distributed-io-benchmark >> , so at least one can know how to execute it manually. > > >

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] GF_CALLOC to GF_MALLOC conversion - is it safe?

2019-03-21 Thread Yaniv Kaul
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:43 PM Yaniv Kaul wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:23 PM Nithya Balachandran > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 16:16, Atin Mukherjee wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> In the last few releases of glusterfs, with stability as a primary theme >>> of the releases,

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] GF_CALLOC to GF_MALLOC conversion - is it safe?

2019-03-21 Thread Yaniv Kaul
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:23 PM Nithya Balachandran wrote: > > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 16:16, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > >> All, >> >> In the last few releases of glusterfs, with stability as a primary theme >> of the releases, there has been lots of changes done on the code >> optimization with

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] GF_CALLOC to GF_MALLOC conversion - is it safe?

2019-03-21 Thread Nithya Balachandran
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 16:16, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > All, > > In the last few releases of glusterfs, with stability as a primary theme > of the releases, there has been lots of changes done on the code > optimization with an expectation that such changes will have gluster to > provide better

Re: [Gluster-devel] Network Block device (NBD) on top of glusterfs

2019-03-21 Thread Prasanna Kalever
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 6:31 PM Xiubo Li wrote: > On 2019/3/21 18:09, Prasanna Kalever wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:00 AM Xiubo Li wrote: > >> All, >> >> I am one of the contributor for gluster-block >> [1] project, and also I >> contribute

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_CALLOC to GF_MALLOC conversion - is it safe?

2019-03-21 Thread Yaniv Kaul
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 12:45 PM Atin Mukherjee wrote: > All, > > In the last few releases of glusterfs, with stability as a primary theme > of the releases, there has been lots of changes done on the code > optimization with an expectation that such changes will have gluster to > provide better

Re: [Gluster-devel] Network Block device (NBD) on top of glusterfs

2019-03-21 Thread Xiubo Li
On 2019/3/21 18:09, Prasanna Kalever wrote: On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:00 AM Xiubo Li > wrote: All, I am one of the contributor forgluster-block [1] project, and also I contribute to linux kernel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] GF_CALLOC to GF_MALLOC conversion - is it safe?

2019-03-21 Thread Raghavendra Gowdappa
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 4:16 PM Atin Mukherjee wrote: > All, > > In the last few releases of glusterfs, with stability as a primary theme > of the releases, there has been lots of changes done on the code > optimization with an expectation that such changes will have gluster to > provide better

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] "rpc_clnt_ping_timer_expired" errors

2019-03-21 Thread Raghavendra Gowdappa
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 4:10 PM Mauro Tridici wrote: > Hi Raghavendra, > > the number of errors reduced, but during last days I received some error > notifications from Nagios server similar to the following one: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ** Nagios *Notification Type: PROBLEMService:

[Gluster-devel] GF_CALLOC to GF_MALLOC conversion - is it safe?

2019-03-21 Thread Atin Mukherjee
All, In the last few releases of glusterfs, with stability as a primary theme of the releases, there has been lots of changes done on the code optimization with an expectation that such changes will have gluster to provide better performance. While many of these changes do help, but off late we

Re: [Gluster-devel] Network Block device (NBD) on top of glusterfs

2019-03-21 Thread Prasanna Kalever
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:00 AM Xiubo Li wrote: > All, > > I am one of the contributor for gluster-block > [1] project, and also I > contribute to linux kernel and open-iscsi > project.[2] > > NBD was around for some time,

Re: [Gluster-devel] The state of lock heal and inodelk/entrylk heal ?

2019-03-21 Thread Kinglong Mee
On 2019/3/21 14:59, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:50 AM Pranith Kumar Karampuri mailto:pkara...@redhat.com>> wrote: On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:15 AM Kinglong Mee > wrote: Hello folks, Lock self healing (recovery

Re: [Gluster-devel] The state of lock heal and inodelk/entrylk heal ?

2019-03-21 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:50 AM Pranith Kumar Karampuri < pkara...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:15 AM Kinglong Mee > wrote: > >> Hello folks, >> >> Lock self healing (recovery or replay) is added at >> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/2766/ >> >> But it is

Re: [Gluster-devel] The state of lock heal and inodelk/entrylk heal ?

2019-03-21 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:15 AM Kinglong Mee wrote: > Hello folks, > > Lock self healing (recovery or replay) is added at > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/2766/ > > But it is removed at > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/12363/ > > I found some information about it at >