<div dir="ltr">Hi Jay,<div><br></div><div>Thanks for the update. I can give a look in the NFS job, it will need some care, like configuring the slave to be a Ubuntu Xenial and setting apparmor, so when you finish the cloning support we have an operational job.</div><div><br></div><div>Erlon </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Jay S. Bryant <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jsbryant@electronicjungle.net" target="_blank">jsbryant@electronicjungle.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On 08/30/2016 08:50 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 8/30/2016 10:50 AM, Jay S. Bryant wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
All,<br>
<br>
I wanted to follow up on the e-mail thread [1] on Cloning support in the<br>
NFS driver. The purpose of this e-mail is to provide the plan for the<br>
NFS driver going forward as I see it.<br>
<br>
First, I am aware that the driver has gone quite some time without care<br>
and feeding. For a number of reasons, the Public Cloud team within IBM<br>
is currently dependent upon the NFS driver working properly for the<br>
cloud environment we are building. Given our current dependence on the<br>
driver we are planning on picking up the driver and maintaining it.<br>
<br>
The first step in this process was getting the existing patch that adds<br>
snapshot support for NFS [2] rebased. I did this work a couple of weeks<br>
ago and also got all the unit tests working for the unit test<br>
environment on the master branch. I now see that it is in merge<br>
conflict again, I plan to continue to keep the patch up-to-date.<br>
<br>
Erlon has been investigating issues with attaching snapshots. It<br>
appears that this may be related to AppArmor running on the system where<br>
the VM is running and attachment is being attempted. I am hoping to<br>
look into the other questions posed in the patch review in the next week<br>
or two.<br>
<br>
The next step is to create a dependent patch, upon the snapshot patch,<br>
to implement cloning. I am planning to also undertake this work. I am<br>
assuming that getting the cloning support in place shouldn't be too<br>
difficult once snapshots are working as it will be just a matter of<br>
using the support from the remotefs driver.<br>
<br>
The last piece of work we have in flight is working on adding QoS<br>
support to the NFS driver. We have the following spec proposed to get<br>
that work started: [3]<br>
<br>
So, we are in the process of bringing the NFS driver up to good<br>
standing. During this process we would greatly appreciate reviews and<br>
input from those of you who have previously worked on the driver in<br>
order to expedite integration of the necessary changes. I feel it is in<br>
the best interest of the community to get the driver updated and<br>
supported given that it is the 4th most used driver according to our<br>
user survey. I think it would not look good to our users if it were to<br>
suddenly be removed.<br>
<br>
Thanks to all of your for your support in this effort!<br>
<br>
Jay<br>
<br>
[1]<br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-August/102193.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/pip<wbr>ermail/openstack-dev/2016-Augu<wbr>st/102193.html</a> <br>
<br>
[2] <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/147186/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#<wbr>/c/147186/</a><br>
<br>
[3] <a href="https://review.openstack.org/361456" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/3<wbr>61456</a><br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>______________________________<wbr>______________ <br>
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.op<wbr>enstack.org?subject:unsubscrib<wbr>e</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi<wbr>-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstac<wbr>k-dev</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
IMO priority #1 is getting the NFS job passing consistently, who is working on that? Last I checked it was failing a bunch because it was running snapshot and clone tests, which obviously don't work since that support isn't implemented in the driver. I think configuring tempest in the devstack-plugin-nfs repo is fairly straightforward, someone just needs to do it.<br>
<br>
But at least that gets you closer to a clean NFS job run which gets it out of the experimental queue (possibly) and as a non-voting job in Cinder so you can see if you're regressing anything (or if anything else regresses it once you have clean CI runs).<br>
<br>
My 2 cents.<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
Matt,<br>
<br>
This is good feedback. I will put a story on our backlog on this for it and try to get that working ASAP.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Jay</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>______________________________<wbr>______________<br>
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.op<wbr>enstack.org?subject:unsubscrib<wbr>e</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi<wbr>-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstac<wbr>k-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>