Gluster users - Mar 2018 - [Gluster-devel] Removal of use-compound-fops option in afr

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:19 AM, Amar Tumballi <atumball at redhat.com>
wrote:
> Pranith,
>
>
>
>>       We found that compound fops is not giving better performance in
>> replicate and I am thinking of removing that code. Sent the patch at
>> https://review.gluster.org/19655
>>
>>
> If I understand it right, as of now AFR is the only component which uses
> Compound FOP. If it stops using that code, should we maintain the compound
> fop codebase at all in other places, like protocol, volgen (decompounder
> etc?)
>
Infra was also supposed to be used by gfapi when compound fops is
introduced. So I think it is not a bad idea to keep it until at least there
is a decision about it. It will be similar to loading feature modules like
quota even when quota is not used on the volume.

>
> Because, if AFR as a module decides compound fop is not useful, and other
> method is better, it is completely a decision of AFR maintainers. I
don't
> see a concern there.
>
> Only if it had an option and if people are using it, then warning them
> upfront about this change is better.
>
By default it is off, so I am not expecting it to be in wide use. Even if
they are using it, I don't see any dramatic improvement in their workload
performance based on the numbers we got. This is going to be affective in
4.1 release.

I also added gluster-users, so that it is communicated to wider audience.
>
> Regards,
> Amar
>
>

-- 
Pranith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20180305/f5c518a5/attachment.html>

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <pkarampu at
redhat.com
> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:19 AM, Amar Tumballi <atumball at
redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Pranith,
>>
>>
>>
>>>       We found that compound fops is not giving better performance
in
>>> replicate and I am thinking of removing that code. Sent the patch
at
>>> https://review.gluster.org/19655
>>>
>>>
>> If I understand it right, as of now AFR is the only component which
uses
>> Compound FOP. If it stops using that code, should we maintain the
compound
>> fop codebase at all in other places, like protocol, volgen
(decompounder
>> etc?)
>>
>
> Infra was also supposed to be used by gfapi when compound fops is
> introduced. So I think it is not a bad idea to keep it until at least there
> is a decision about it. It will be similar to loading feature modules like
> quota even when quota is not used on the volume.
>
Got it, makes sense!

>
>
>>
>> Because, if AFR as a module decides compound fop is not useful, and
other
>> method is better, it is completely a decision of AFR maintainers. I
don't
>> see a concern there.
>>
>> Only if it had an option and if people are using it, then warning them
>> upfront about this change is better.
>>
>
> By default it is off, so I am not expecting it to be in wide use. Even if
> they are using it, I don't see any dramatic improvement in their
workload
> performance based on the numbers we got. This is going to be affective in
> 4.1 release.
>
> I also added gluster-users, so that it is communicated to wider audience.
>
That's nice!

>> Regards,
>> Amar
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20180305/987ef843/attachment.html>