From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Tue Jun 21 02:54:21 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCA22AC52A7 for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 02:54:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jkh@ixsystems.com) Received: from barracuda.ixsystems.com (barracuda.ixsystems.com [12.229.62.30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.ixsystems.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A041D12BA for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 02:54:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jkh@ixsystems.com) X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1466477660-08ca0411401af1c0001-3nHGF7 Received: from zimbra.ixsystems.com ([10.246.0.20]) by barracuda.ixsystems.com with ESMTP id fH24DdDtIrRWPyYo (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:54:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: jkh@ixsystems.com X-Barracuda-RBL-Trusted-Forwarder: 10.246.0.20 X-ASG-Whitelist: Client Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.ixsystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 656F1DE1BD2; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zimbra.ixsystems.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.ixsystems.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 6CbDzFxCe2mH; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.ixsystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF189DE1BD0; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:54:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ixsystems.com Received: from zimbra.ixsystems.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.ixsystems.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id HRcf4eGmXRwl; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:54:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.20.0.18] (vpn.ixsystems.com [10.249.0.2]) by zimbra.ixsystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A5D32DE1BCB; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:54:19 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: pNFS server Plan B From: Jordan Hubbard X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: pNFS server Plan B In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:54:24 -0700 Cc: freebsd-fs , Alexander Motin Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <74CD7EB1-1656-4511-8B63-5C4401D1BB8D@ixsystems.com> References: <1524639039.147096032.1465856925174.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca> To: Doug Rabson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-Barracuda-Connect: UNKNOWN[10.246.0.20] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1466477660 X-Barracuda-Encrypted: ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 X-Barracuda-URL: https://10.246.0.26:443/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at ixsystems.com X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 02:54:21 -0000 OK, wow. This appears to have turned into something of a referendum on = NFS and, just based on Rick and Doug=E2=80=99s defense of pNFS, I also = think my commentary on that may have been misconstrued somewhat. So, let me just set the record straight by saying that I=E2=80=99m all = in favor of pNFS. It addresses a very definite need in the Enterprise = marketplace and gives FreeBSD yet another arrow in its quiver when it = comes to being =E2=80=9Ca player=E2=80=9D in that (ever-growing) arena. = The only point I was trying to make before was that if we could ALSO = address clustering in a more general way as part of providing a pNFS = solution, that would be great. I am not, however, the one writing the = code and if my comments were in any way discouraging to the folks that = are, I apologize and want to express my enthusiasm for it. If iXsystems = engineering resources can contribute in any way to moving this ball = forward, let me know and we=E2=80=99ll start doing so. On the more general point of =E2=80=9CNFS is hard, let=E2=80=99s go = shopping=E2=80=9D let me also say that it=E2=80=99s kind of important = not to conflate end-user targeted solutions with enterprise solutions. = Setting up a Kerberized NFSv4, for example, is not really designed to be = trivial to set up and if anyone is waiting for that to happen, they may = be waiting a very long time (like, forever). NFS and SMB are both = fairly simple technologies to use if you restrict yourself to using, = say, just 20% of their overall feature-sets. Once you add ACLs, = Directory Services, user/group and permissions mappings, and any of the = other more enterprise-centric features of these filesharing = technologies, however, things rapidly get more complicated and the = DevOps people who routinely play in these kinds of environments are = quite happy to have all those options available because they=E2=80=99re = not consumers operating in consumer environments. =20 Sun didn=E2=80=99t design NFS to be particularly consumer-centric, for = that matter, and if you think SMB is =E2=80=9Csimple=E2=80=9D because = you clicked Network on Windows Explorer one day and stuff just = automagically appeared, you should try operating it in a serious Windows = Enterprise environment (just flip through some of the SMB bugs in the = FreeNAS bug tracker - = https://bugs.freenas.org/projects/freenas/issues?utf8=3D=E2=9C=93&set_filt= er=3D1&f%5B%5D=3Dstatus_id&op%5Bstatus_id%5D=3D*&f%5B%5D=3Dcategory_id&op%= 5Bcategory_id%5D=3D%3D&v%5Bcategory_id%5D%5B%5D=3D57&f%5B%5D=3D&c%5B%5D=3D= tracker&c%5B%5D=3Dstatus&c%5B%5D=3Dpriority&c%5B%5D=3Dsubject&c%5B%5D=3Das= signed_to&c%5B%5D=3Dupdated_on&c%5B%5D=3Dfixed_version&group_by=3D - if = you want to see the kinds of problems users wrestle with all the time). Anyway, I=E2=80=99ll get off the soapbox now, I just wanted to dispute = the premise that =E2=80=9Csimple file sharing=E2=80=9D that is also = =E2=80=9Csecure file sharing=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cflexible file = sharing=E2=80=9D doesn=E2=80=99t really exist. The simplest end-user = oriented file sharing system I=E2=80=99ve used to date is probably AFP, = and Apple has been trying to kill it for years, probably because it = doesn=E2=80=99t have all those extra knobs and Kerberos / Directory = Services integration business users have been asking for (it=E2=80=99s = also not particularly industry standard). - Jordan