[Nfs-ganesha-devel] Announce Push of V2.6-rc2

Branch next Tag:V2.6-rc2 NOTE: This merge includes an ntirpc pullup, please update your submodule. Release Highlights * Don't print "CRIT: Likely bug.." trace when attr mask is ATTR_RDATTR_ERR * Pullup NTIRPC through #99 Signed-off-by: Frank S. Filz Contents:

Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] Possibility of converting FSAL_VFS and FSAL_XFS to use stackable FSALS

Daniel Gryniewicz wrote on Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:19:27AM -0500: >> As to Lustre, I'm pretty sure the stackable FSAL will work fine. A stacked >> FSAL does have the pointer to the subfsal object, and knows which FSAL is >> the subfsal, so in this case where FSAL_LUSTRE MUST stack on top of

Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] Possibility of converting FSAL_VFS and FSAL_XFS to use stackable FSALS

On 01/12/2018 10:08 AM, Frank Filz wrote: So, the linux/freebsd split was not something I was considering for stacking. I agree, that doesn't match well. But the VFS subfsal API looks like it can just go away and be a stack instead. And I certainly would not like to see it extended.

Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NFS-Ganesha and compatible ceph version

All work necessary to work in containerized ceph/ganesha will be backported to 2.6, as it's ready. This means that some version 2.6.x (likely low, maybe 2 or 3) will be fully ready for containerized deployment. This also means that 2.7.0 will work out-of-the-box, since the work will be done

Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] Possibility of converting FSAL_VFS and FSAL_XFS to use stackable FSALS

> So, the linux/freebsd split was not something I was considering for stacking. I > agree, that doesn't match well. But the VFS subfsal API looks like it can just > go away and be a stack instead. And I certainly would not like to see it > extended. Yea, I think the subfsal could go away.

Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] Possibility of converting FSAL_VFS and FSAL_XFS to use stackable FSALS

So, the linux/freebsd split was not something I was considering for stacking. I agree, that doesn't match well. But the VFS subfsal API looks like it can just go away and be a stack instead. And I certainly would not like to see it extended. Daniel On 01/09/2018 06:19 PM, Frank Filz

Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NFS-Ganesha and compatible ceph version

Hi Daniel, Thanks for reply. Does it mean that 2.7 will already be ready to support containerized nfs-ganesha? Are there more details on what exact features need to be implemented in nfs-ganesha and cephfs to make OpenShift/Kubernerties work. I am aware of blog post by Jeff:

Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] Possibility of converting FSAL_VFS and FSAL_XFS to use stackable FSALS

On 01/10/18 16:04, Frank Filz wrote: Hi Frank, others, Frank Filz wrote on Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 03:19:46PM -0800: All in all, these functions are not a great fit for the FSAL API so I'm not sure it would be a good solution. Forcing some of the functions into FSAL methods would require some