Gluster users - Nov 2019 - [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Proposal to change gNFSstatus

I personally wouldn't call three years ago ? when we started to deprecate
it, in glusterfs-3.9 ? a recent change.

As a community the decision was made to move to NFS-Ganesha as the
preferred NFS solution, but it was agreed to keep the old code in the tree
for those who wanted it. There have been plans to drop it from the
community packages for most of those three years, but we didn't follow
through across the board until fairly recently. Perhaps the most telling
piece of data is that it's been gone from the packages in the CentOS
Storage SIG in glusterfs-4.0, -4.1, -5, -6, and -7 with no complaints ever,
that I can recall.

Ganesha is a preferable solution because it supports NFSv4, NFSv4.1,
NFSv4.2, and pNFS, in addition to legacy NFSv3. More importantly, it is
actively developed, maintained, and supported, both in the community and
commercially. There are several vendors selling it, or support for it; and
there are community packages for it for all the same distributions that
Gluster packages are available for.

Out in the world, the default these days is NFSv4. Specifically v4.2 or
v4.1 depending on how recent your linux kernel is. In the linux kernel,
client mounts start negotiating for v4.2 and work down to v4.1, v4.0, and
only as a last resort v3. NFSv3 client support in the linux kernel largely
exists at this point only because of the large number of legacy servers
still running that can't do anything higher than v3. The linux NFS
developers would drop the v3 support in a heartbeat if they could.

IMO, providing it, and calling it maintained, only encourages people to
keep using a dead end solution. Anyone in favor of bringing back NFSv2,
SSHv1, or X10R4? No? I didn't think so.

The recent issue[1] where someone built gnfs in glusterfs-7.0 on CentOS7
strongly suggests to me that gnfs is not actually working well. Three years
of no maintenance seems to have taken its toll.

Other people are more than welcome to build their own packages from the
src.rpms and/or tarballs that are available from gluster ? and support
them. It's still in the source and there are no plans to remove it. (Unlike
most of the other deprecated features which were recently removed in
glusterfs-7.)



[1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/764

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 5:31 AM Amar Tumballi <amarts at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As per the discussion on https://review.gluster.org/23645, recently we
> changed the status of gNFS (gluster's native NFSv3 support) feature to
> 'Depricated / Orphan' state. (ref:
> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L185..L189).
> With this email, I am proposing to change the status again to 'Odd
Fixes'
> (ref: https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L22)
>
> TL;DR;
>
> I understand the current maintainers are not able to focus on maintaining
> it as the focus of the project, as earlier described, is keeping
> NFS-Ganesha based integration with glusterfs. But, I am volunteering along
> with Xie Changlong (currently working at Chinamobile), to keep the feature
> running as it used to in previous versions. Hence the status of 'Odd
> Fixes'.
>
> Before sending the patch to make these changes, I am proposing it here
> now, as gNFS is not even shipped with latest glusterfs-7.0 releases. I have
> heard from some users that it was working great for them with earlier
> releases, as all they wanted was NFS v3 support, and not much of features
> from gNFS. Also note that, even though the packages are not built, none of
> the regression tests using gNFS are stopped with latest master, so it is
> working same from at least last 2 years.
>
> I request the package maintainers to please add '--with gnfs' (or
> --enable-gnfs) back to their release script through this email, so those
> users wanting to use gNFS happily can continue to use it. Also points to
> users/admins is that, the status is 'Odd Fixes', so don't
expect any
> 'enhancements' on the features provided by gNFS.
>
> Happy to hear feedback, if any.
>
> Regards,
> Amar
>
> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20191121/b6e17109/attachment.html>

Independent of anything else?

Maintain it. Send patches to gerrit. Get the requisite +2 reviews on the
patches. Amar still has commit privs AFAIK; he can merge anything that gets
two votes.

It's open source meritocracy.

If there's real support for it then it makes a stronger case for adding it
back to the community packages.

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 4:14 PM Kaleb Keithley <kkeithle at redhat.com>
wrote:
> I personally wouldn't call three years ago ? when we started to
deprecate
> it, in glusterfs-3.9 ? a recent change.
>
> As a community the decision was made to move to NFS-Ganesha as the
> preferred NFS solution, but it was agreed to keep the old code in the tree
> for those who wanted it. There have been plans to drop it from the
> community packages for most of those three years, but we didn't follow
> through across the board until fairly recently. Perhaps the most telling
> piece of data is that it's been gone from the packages in the CentOS
> Storage SIG in glusterfs-4.0, -4.1, -5, -6, and -7 with no complaints ever,
> that I can recall.
>
> Ganesha is a preferable solution because it supports NFSv4, NFSv4.1,
> NFSv4.2, and pNFS, in addition to legacy NFSv3. More importantly, it is
> actively developed, maintained, and supported, both in the community and
> commercially. There are several vendors selling it, or support for it; and
> there are community packages for it for all the same distributions that
> Gluster packages are available for.
>
> Out in the world, the default these days is NFSv4. Specifically v4.2 or
> v4.1 depending on how recent your linux kernel is. In the linux kernel,
> client mounts start negotiating for v4.2 and work down to v4.1, v4.0, and
> only as a last resort v3. NFSv3 client support in the linux kernel largely
> exists at this point only because of the large number of legacy servers
> still running that can't do anything higher than v3. The linux NFS
> developers would drop the v3 support in a heartbeat if they could.
>
> IMO, providing it, and calling it maintained, only encourages people to
> keep using a dead end solution. Anyone in favor of bringing back NFSv2,
> SSHv1, or X10R4? No? I didn't think so.
>
> The recent issue[1] where someone built gnfs in glusterfs-7.0 on CentOS7
> strongly suggests to me that gnfs is not actually working well. Three years
> of no maintenance seems to have taken its toll.
>
> Other people are more than welcome to build their own packages from the
> src.rpms and/or tarballs that are available from gluster ? and support
> them. It's still in the source and there are no plans to remove it.
(Unlike
> most of the other deprecated features which were recently removed in
> glusterfs-7.)
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/764
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 5:31 AM Amar Tumballi <amarts at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> As per the discussion on https://review.gluster.org/23645, recently we
>> changed the status of gNFS (gluster's native NFSv3 support) feature
to
>> 'Depricated / Orphan' state. (ref:
>>
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L185..L189).
>> With this email, I am proposing to change the status again to 'Odd
Fixes'
>> (ref: https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L22)
>>
>> TL;DR;
>>
>> I understand the current maintainers are not able to focus on
maintaining
>> it as the focus of the project, as earlier described, is keeping
>> NFS-Ganesha based integration with glusterfs. But, I am volunteering
along
>> with Xie Changlong (currently working at Chinamobile), to keep the
feature
>> running as it used to in previous versions. Hence the status of
'Odd
>> Fixes'.
>>
>> Before sending the patch to make these changes, I am proposing it here
>> now, as gNFS is not even shipped with latest glusterfs-7.0 releases. I
have
>> heard from some users that it was working great for them with earlier
>> releases, as all they wanted was NFS v3 support, and not much of
features
>> from gNFS. Also note that, even though the packages are not built, none
of
>> the regression tests using gNFS are stopped with latest master, so it
is
>> working same from at least last 2 years.
>>
>> I request the package maintainers to please add '--with gnfs'
(or
>> --enable-gnfs) back to their release script through this email, so
those
>> users wanting to use gNFS happily can continue to use it. Also points
to
>> users/admins is that, the status is 'Odd Fixes', so don't
expect any
>> 'enhancements' on the features provided by gNFS.
>>
>> Happy to hear feedback, if any.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Amar
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> maintainers mailing list
>> maintainers at gluster.org
>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20191121/efdb2e9f/attachment.html>

? 2019/11/22 5:14, Kaleb Keithley ??:
> I personally wouldn't call three years ago ? when we started to 
> deprecate it, in glusterfs-3.9 ? a recent change.
>
> As a community the?decision?was made to move to NFS-Ganesha as the 
> preferred NFS solution, but it was agreed to keep the old code in the 
> tree for those who wanted it. There have been plans to drop it from 
> the community packages for most of those three years, but we didn't 
> follow through across the board until fairly recently. Perhaps the 
> most telling piece of data is that it's been gone from the packages in 
> the CentOS Storage SIG in glusterfs-4.0, -4.1, -5, -6, and -7 with no 
> complaints ever, that I can recall.
>
> Ganesha is a preferable solution because it supports NFSv4, NFSv4.1, 
> NFSv4.2, and pNFS, in addition to legacy NFSv3. More importantly, it 
> is actively developed, maintained, and supported, both in the 
> community and commercially. There are several vendors selling it, or 
> support for it; and there are community packages for it for all the 
> same distributions that Gluster packages are available for.
>
> Out in the world, the default these days is NFSv4. Specifically v4.2 
> or v4.1 depending on how recent your linux kernel is. In the linux 
> kernel, client mounts start negotiating for v4.2 and work down to 
> v4.1, v4.0, and only as a last resort v3. NFSv3 client support in the 
> linux kernel largely exists at this point only because of the large 
> number of legacy servers still running that can't do anything higher 
> than v3. The linux NFS developers would drop the v3 support in a 
> heartbeat if they could.
>
> IMO, providing it, and calling it maintained, only encourages people 
> to keep using a dead end solution. Anyone in favor of bringing back 
> NFSv2, SSHv1, or X10R4? No? I didn't think so.
>
> The recent issue[1] where someone built gnfs in glusterfs-7.0 on 
> CentOS7 strongly suggests to me that gnfs is not actually working 
> well. Three years of no maintenance seems to have taken its toll.
>
> Other people are more than welcome to build their own packages from 
> the src.rpms and/or tarballs that are available from gluster ? and 
> support them. It's still in the source and there are no plans to 
> remove it. (Unlike most of the other deprecated features which were 
> recently removed in glusterfs-7.)
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/764
>
It seems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1727248 has 
resolved this issue.

Here i'll talk about something from commerical company view.? For 
security reasons most government procurement projects only allow 
universal storage protocol(nfs, cifs etc) what means fuse will be 
excluded.? Consindering performance requirements, the only option is nfs.

Nfsv4 is stateful protocol, but i see on performance improvement. Trust 
me, nfs-ganesha(v3, v4) shows? ~30% performance degradation versus gnfs? 
for either small or big files r/w in practice. Further, many customers 
prefer nfs client than cifs in windows, because the poor cifs 
performance, AFAIK nfs-ganesha is not going well with windows nfs client.

Gnfs is stable enough, we have about ~1000 servers, 4~24 servers for a 
gluster cluster, about ~2000 nfs clients, all works fine till the last 
two years expect some memleak issue.

Thanks

 ??? -Xie
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 5:31 AM Amar Tumballi <amarts at gmail.com 
> <mailto:amarts at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi All,
>
>     As per the discussion on https://review.gluster.org/23645,
>     recently we changed the status of gNFS (gluster's native NFSv3
>     support)?feature to 'Depricated / Orphan' state. (ref:
>    
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L185..L189).
>     With this email, I am proposing to change the status again to 'Odd
>     Fixes' (ref:
>     https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L22)
>
>     TL;DR;
>
>     I understand the current maintainers are not able to focus on
>     maintaining it as the focus of the project, as earlier described,
>     is keeping NFS-Ganesha based integration with glusterfs. But, I am
>     volunteering along with Xie Changlong (currently working at
>     Chinamobile), to keep the feature running as it used to in
>     previous versions. Hence the status of 'Odd Fixes'.
>
>     Before sending the patch to make these changes, I am proposing it
>     here now, as gNFS is not even shipped with latest glusterfs-7.0
>     releases. I have heard from some users that it was working great
>     for them with earlier releases, as all they wanted was NFS v3
>     support, and not much of features from gNFS. Also note that, even
>     though the packages are not built, none of the regression tests
>     using gNFS are stopped with latest master, so it is working same
>     from at least last 2 years.
>
>     I request the package maintainers to please add '--with gnfs'
(or
>     --enable-gnfs) back to their release script through this email, so
>     those users wanting to use gNFS happily can continue to use it.
>     Also points to users/admins is that, the status is 'Odd Fixes',
so
>     don't expect any 'enhancements' on the features provided by
gNFS.
>
>     Happy to hear feedback, if any.
>
>     Regards,
>     Amar
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     maintainers mailing list
>     maintainers at gluster.org <mailto:maintainers at gluster.org>
>     https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Community Meeting Calendar:
>
> APAC Schedule -
> Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
>
>
> NA/EMEA Schedule -
> Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
>
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20191122/0452c945/attachment.html>

~~Get in a word~~

Hi,? Kaleb Keithley. Could you give some comments on below url ? We 
encounter it in practice.

https://review.gerrithub.io/c/ffilz/nfs-ganesha/+/465149

Thanks

? 2019/11/22 5:14, Kaleb Keithley ??:
> I personally wouldn't call three years ago ? when we started to 
> deprecate it, in glusterfs-3.9 ? a recent change.
>
> As a community the?decision?was made to move to NFS-Ganesha as the 
> preferred NFS solution, but it was agreed to keep the old code in the 
> tree for those who wanted it. There have been plans to drop it from 
> the community packages for most of those three years, but we didn't 
> follow through across the board until fairly recently. Perhaps the 
> most telling piece of data is that it's been gone from the packages in 
> the CentOS Storage SIG in glusterfs-4.0, -4.1, -5, -6, and -7 with no 
> complaints ever, that I can recall.
>
> Ganesha is a preferable solution because it supports NFSv4, NFSv4.1, 
> NFSv4.2, and pNFS, in addition to legacy NFSv3. More importantly, it 
> is actively developed, maintained, and supported, both in the 
> community and commercially. There are several vendors selling it, or 
> support for it; and there are community packages for it for all the 
> same distributions that Gluster packages are available for.
>
> Out in the world, the default these days is NFSv4. Specifically v4.2 
> or v4.1 depending on how recent your linux kernel is. In the linux 
> kernel, client mounts start negotiating for v4.2 and work down to 
> v4.1, v4.0, and only as a last resort v3. NFSv3 client support in the 
> linux kernel largely exists at this point only because of the large 
> number of legacy servers still running that can't do anything higher 
> than v3. The linux NFS developers would drop the v3 support in a 
> heartbeat if they could.
>
> IMO, providing it, and calling it maintained, only encourages people 
> to keep using a dead end solution. Anyone in favor of bringing back 
> NFSv2, SSHv1, or X10R4? No? I didn't think so.
>
> The recent issue[1] where someone built gnfs in glusterfs-7.0 on 
> CentOS7 strongly suggests to me that gnfs is not actually working 
> well. Three years of no maintenance seems to have taken its toll.
>
> Other people are more than welcome to build their own packages from 
> the src.rpms and/or tarballs that are available from gluster ? and 
> support them. It's still in the source and there are no plans to 
> remove it. (Unlike most of the other deprecated features which were 
> recently removed in glusterfs-7.)
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/764
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 5:31 AM Amar Tumballi <amarts at gmail.com 
> <mailto:amarts at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi All,
>
>     As per the discussion on https://review.gluster.org/23645,
>     recently we changed the status of gNFS (gluster's native NFSv3
>     support)?feature to 'Depricated / Orphan' state. (ref:
>    
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L185..L189).
>     With this email, I am proposing to change the status again to 'Odd
>     Fixes' (ref:
>     https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/MAINTAINERS#L22)
>
>     TL;DR;
>
>     I understand the current maintainers are not able to focus on
>     maintaining it as the focus of the project, as earlier described,
>     is keeping NFS-Ganesha based integration with glusterfs. But, I am
>     volunteering along with Xie Changlong (currently working at
>     Chinamobile), to keep the feature running as it used to in
>     previous versions. Hence the status of 'Odd Fixes'.
>
>     Before sending the patch to make these changes, I am proposing it
>     here now, as gNFS is not even shipped with latest glusterfs-7.0
>     releases. I have heard from some users that it was working great
>     for them with earlier releases, as all they wanted was NFS v3
>     support, and not much of features from gNFS. Also note that, even
>     though the packages are not built, none of the regression tests
>     using gNFS are stopped with latest master, so it is working same
>     from at least last 2 years.
>
>     I request the package maintainers to please add '--with gnfs'
(or
>     --enable-gnfs) back to their release script through this email, so
>     those users wanting to use gNFS happily can continue to use it.
>     Also points to users/admins is that, the status is 'Odd Fixes',
so
>     don't expect any 'enhancements' on the features provided by
gNFS.
>
>     Happy to hear feedback, if any.
>
>     Regards,
>     Amar
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     maintainers mailing list
>     maintainers at gluster.org <mailto:maintainers at gluster.org>
>     https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>
>
> ________
>
> Community Meeting Calendar:
>
> APAC Schedule -
> Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 11:30 AM IST
> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
>
> NA/EMEA Schedule -
> Every 1st and 3rd Tuesday at 01:00 PM EDT
> Bridge: https://bluejeans.com/441850968
>
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20191123/a3709c17/attachment.html>