From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 19 18:40:49 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDFEF10656D8; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:40:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from gigi.cs.uoguelph.ca (gigi.cs.uoguelph.ca [131.104.94.210]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C5158FC08; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:40:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca (muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.102]) by gigi.cs.uoguelph.ca (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n2JIemOk002077; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:40:48 -0400 Received: from localhost (rmacklem@localhost) by muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca (8.11.7p3+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id n2JIkDH11502; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:46:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca: rmacklem owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:46:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Rick Macklem X-X-Sender: rmacklem@muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca To: Zachary Loafman In-Reply-To: <20090319164251.GA13081@zloafman.west.isilon.com> Message-ID: References: <20090315205229.GV55200@elvis.mu.org> <20090319164251.GA13081@zloafman.west.isilon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.63 on 131.104.94.210 Cc: Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS version 4.0 for FreeBSD-CURRENT X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:40:51 -0000 On Thu, 19 Mar 2009, Zachary Loafman wrote: > First off, I wanted to start by saying something that may interest the > community at large: We (Isilon) recently staffed a small NFS group. Our > intention is to use and extend Rick's awesome effort. We will have three > full-time employees working on producitizing it for us "soon" - by > mid-May all three employees should be working on v4. It is our intention > to give the work back, but we're still trying to work out our > branching/upstreaming model. > Sounds like good news to me. > I don't know if that affects the timing on this being merged to CURRENT > or not. It might be nice if we had an opportunity to review some things > prior to APIs/VOPs being set in stone, but it would also be nice to get > wider exposure for Rick's code. > The only VFS change I've done is redefining the va_filerev/i_modrev attribute/i-node field such that it satisfies the requirements of the nfsv4 Change attribute. (Way back when, i_modrev was put in for not quite nfs by me, I think? I don't think anything else uses it, but I can't be sure?) The changes are: 1 - move it from the in memory i-node to spare space at the end of the on-disk i-node, so that it will survive a server crash. 2 - incrementing it for metadata changes as well as data changes (I can't think how having it survive a crash could break any app. that might be using it. The fact that it's value would change for metadata changes as well as data changes might affect something?) Does anyone know of an app. that uses the va_filerev attribute? [stuff snipped] > I think v4.1 is closer than you might think. We've received numerous > requests for pNFS, and I think many vendors will ship basic 4.1 stacks > this year. > I'll email on nfsv4@linux-nfs.org and ask. (I haven't been to a testing event, but I'd be under an NDA if I had been. My impression was that no one had SSV working yet and, although there had been a fair amount of pNFS testing, sessions were lagging behind. No sessions (and SSV is the front end part of sessions) and no 4.1. (I wouldn't be surprised if some server vendors are getting close, but without a Linux client...) > > Can you put us in contact? I'd like to avoid duplication of effort here. > I'll ping him via email and then contact you. [good stuff snipped] rick