[Top] [All Lists]

Re: a simple and scalable pNFS block layout server

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: a simple and scalable pNFS block layout server
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 12:32:22 -0500
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1420561721-9150-1-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx>
References: <1420561721-9150-1-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 05:28:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> This series adds support for the pNFS operations in NFS v4.1, as well
> as a block layout driver that can export block based filesystems that
> implement a few additional export operations.  Support for XFS is
> provided in this series, but other filesystems could be added easily.
> The core pNFS code of course owns its heritage to the existing Linux
> pNFS server prototype, but except for a few bits and pieces in the
> XDR path nothing is left from it.
> The design of this new pNFS server is fairly different from the old
> one - while the old one implemented very little semantics in nfsd
> and left almost everything to filesystems my implementation implements
> as much as possible in common nfsd code, then dispatches to a layout
> driver that still is part of nfsd and only then calls into the
> filesystem, thus keeping it free from intimate pNFS knowledge.
> More details are document in the individual patch descriptions and
> code comments.
> This code is also available from:
>       git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/pnfs.git pnfsd-for-3.20

Neat, thanks!  I'll look at it.

Some naive questions:

        - do we have evidence that this is useful in its current form?

        - any advice on testing?  Is there was some simple virtual setup
          that would allow any loser with no special hardware (e.g., me)
          to check whether they've broken the block server?

        - any debugging advice?  E.g., have you checked if current
          wireshark can handle the MDS traffic?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>