Ayush Ujjwal
2021-May-25 12:22 UTC
[Gluster-users] [Gluster-devel] Meeting minutes for the Gluster community meeting held on 25-05-2021
# Gluster Community Meeting - 25/05/2021
### Previous Meeting minutes:
- [Meeting Minutes](http://github.com/gluster/community/meetings)
### Date/Time: Check the [community
calendar](https://calendar.google.com/event?action=TEMPLATE&tmeid=MDQ0YmRydTllMXYzdWFoMmpsbjdqNXJlYmNfMjAyMDEwMjdUMDkwMDAwWiBzYWptb2hhbUByZWRoYXQuY29t&tmsrc=sajmoham%40redhat.com&scp=ALL)
### Bridge
- 2nd / 4th Tuesday's, 02:30PM IST
- Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk
-------
### Attendance
Name (#gluster-dev alias) - company
* Ayush Ujjwal - Red Hat
* Nishith Vihar - Red Hat
* Pranith Kumar K - PhonePe.com
* srijan-sivakumar - Red Hat
* sankarshan - Kadalu.IO
* Sunil Kumar - Red Hat
* Shwetha Acharya - Red Hat
* Csaba Henk - Red Hat
* Saju Mohammed - Red Hat
* Nikhil Ladha - Red Hat
### User stories
* None
### Community
* Project metrics:
| Metrics | Value |
| ------------------------- | -------- |
|[Coverity](https://scan.coverity.com/projects/gluster-glusterfs) | 38 |
|[Clang Scan](https://build.gluster.org/job/clang-scan/lastBuild/) | 89 |
|[Test
coverage](https://build.gluster.org/job/line-coverage/lastCompletedBuild/Line_20Coverage_20Report/)|
70.9 |
|[Gluster User Queries in last 14
days](https://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2021-May/thread.html#start)
| 27 |
|[Total Github issues](https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues)
| 315 |
* Any release updates?
* None
* Blocker issues across the project?
* It looks like the lock-recovery changes introduced with
https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/22712/ has issues. We
already fixed https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/2456 and
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/2337 but looks like the
code is buggy. Need someone to take a look at the difference between
posix-locks and client xlators in how the locks are maintained to fix
the issue completely.
* Notable thread form mailing list
* Not exactly from mailing list. Slack user pinged me and asked me
if it is possible to let the users know of any known issues in the
latest releases so that they can make a decision about which version
to use. For example: 9.0 and 9.1 had protocol issue.
* Along the same lines, I wanted to ask one more question. Should
we release beta-releases for major releases so that we get feedback
about any issues that happen in their particular environment to
address the issues even before the stable releases are made?
### Conferences / Meetups
* [SYSTOR 21](https://www.systor.org/2021/cfp.html)
* June 14 - June 16,2021
* [SDC India 2021](https://www.snia.org/events/sdcindia)
* Submission of presentations is OPEN
* Talks related to gluster:
- None.
### GlusterFS - v10 and beyond
* No new updates
### Developer focus
* Any design specs to discuss?
* None
### Component status
* Arbiter - stable/maintained
* AFR - stable/maintained (Release 9 is affected by
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/2462)
* DHT - stable/maintained
* EC - stable/maintained
* DOC - stable/maintained
* Geo Replication - stable/maintained
* Glusterd - stable/maintained
* thin-arbiter - stable/maintained
### Recent Blog posts / Document updates
* No new blog posts recently.
### Host
* Who will host next meeting? [Ayush]
- Host will need to send out the agenda 24hr - 12hrs in advance to
mailing list, and also make sure to send the meeting minutes.
- Host will need to reach out to one user at least who can talk
about their usecase, their experience, and their needs.
- Host needs to send meeting minutes as PR to
http://github.com/gluster/community
- Host has to send the meeting minutes as a mail to the
gluster-devel and gluster-users list.
### Notetaker
* Who will take notes from the next meeting? [Ayush]
### RoundTable
* None
### Action Items on host
* Check-in Minutes of meeting for this meeting
Regards,
Ayush Ujjwal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20210525/56bf762d/attachment.html>
sankarshan
2021-May-25 13:20 UTC
[Gluster-users] [Gluster-devel] Meeting minutes for the Gluster community meeting held on 25-05-2021
Ayush - thank you for hosting what is your first Gluster community meeting! It was an excellent effort at keeping the conversation moving along. Some additional comments in-line. On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 17:52, Ayush Ujjwal <aujjwal at redhat.com> wrote:> > # Gluster Community Meeting - 25/05/2021[snip]> * Project metrics: > > | Metrics | Value | > | ------------------------- | -------- | > |[Coverity](https://scan.coverity.com/projects/gluster-glusterfs) | 38 | > |[Clang Scan](https://build.gluster.org/job/clang-scan/lastBuild/) | 89 | > |[Test coverage](https://build.gluster.org/job/line-coverage/lastCompletedBuild/Line_20Coverage_20Report/)| 70.9 | > |[Gluster User Queries in last 14 days](https://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2021-May/thread.html#start) | 27 | > |[Total Github issues](https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues) | 315 | >As brought up at the meeting - it might be useful to discuss the trend of these values and from there deduce if these are in the right direction. The values in isolation do not communicate enough data to determine whether there are opportunities to improve. At a certain point in time in early 2020 there was intense focus on test coverage. I am not sure if that has resulted in actual better coverage or just spreading butter on toast.> > * Any release updates? > * None > > * Blocker issues across the project? > * It looks like the lock-recovery changes introduced with https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/22712/ has issues. We already fixed https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/2456 and https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/2337 but looks like the code is buggy. Need someone to take a look at the difference between posix-locks and client xlators in how the locks are maintained to fix the issue completely. >As a project it is necessary to do right by our community - this means that the impact of the issue and remedy/workaround should be immediately shared widely enough to ensure that this is not missed. Since the issues are tagged 'blocker' I am guessing that these meet the somewhat established criteria of a blocker issue and would need an enhanced level of attention. Have the issues been triaged and developers assigned?> > * Notable thread form mailing list > * Not exactly from mailing list. Slack user pinged me and asked me if it is possible to let the users know of any known issues in the latest releases so that they can make a decision about which version to use. For example: 9.0 and 9.1 had protocol issue. > * Along the same lines, I wanted to ask one more question. Should we release beta-releases for major releases so that we get feedback about any issues that happen in their particular environment to address the issues even before the stable releases are made? > >I've offered to look at the criteria which defines a 'beta' and check how it aligns with a release schedule. The history of 'beta' releases of storage software (as compared to say a browser) is that we have often received no uptake. There are many reasons for this - but one key aspect is that it is additional work being asked from the community. If the 'beta' is reasonably well described perhaps the accrued value from this testing cycle would be better understood.