Sunday, 2018-03-18

*** a-pugachev has quit IRC01:00
*** kaisers_ has joined #openstack-manila02:28
*** kaisers has quit IRC02:31
*** caowei has joined #openstack-manila02:57
*** caowei has quit IRC03:53
*** caowei has joined #openstack-manila03:53
*** ianychoi__ has quit IRC04:30
*** kaisers_ has quit IRC06:04
*** kaisers has joined #openstack-manila06:31
*** pcaruana has quit IRC07:18
*** pcaruana has joined #openstack-manila07:19
*** kaisers has quit IRC08:19
*** kaisers has joined #openstack-manila08:19
*** ianychoi has joined #openstack-manila08:21
*** kaisers has quit IRC08:59
*** kaisers has joined #openstack-manila09:01
*** kaisers has quit IRC09:05
*** kaisers has joined #openstack-manila09:05
*** dsariel has joined #openstack-manila09:16
*** ianychoi_ has joined #openstack-manila09:46
*** ianychoi has quit IRC09:49
*** arnewiebalck_ has joined #openstack-manila10:36
*** cfey has quit IRC10:50
*** cfey has joined #openstack-manila10:51
*** cfey has quit IRC11:26
*** BV9GP2olspookish has joined #openstack-manila11:46
*** cfey has joined #openstack-manila12:46
*** cfey has quit IRC12:58
*** cfey has joined #openstack-manila13:00
*** cfey has quit IRC13:13
*** cfey has joined #openstack-manila13:14
*** openstackgerrit has joined #openstack-manila13:25
openstackgerritzhongjun proposed openstack/manila-specs master: Support metadata for access rule resource  https://review.openstack.org/55110613:25
*** zhongjun_ has joined #openstack-manila13:46
zhongjun_bswartz tbarron : Could you take a look at the access metadata spec when you have free time? Thanks https://review.openstack.org/55110614:33
*** assassin has quit IRC14:34
tbarronzhongjun_: Thanks, I'm going to prioritize doing spec reviews this week.14:40
tbarronzhongjun_: What happended to the *squash attributes proposal that you presented in PTG?  I don't see a spec for that.14:41
tbarrons/happended/happened/14:41
zhongjun_Yes, the squash attributes did not proposal now14:43
tbarronAre you saying that you are not going to propose that?  Is that because you are going to rely on the metadata field instead?14:43
zhongjun_yes, I am not going to propose that in rocky14:47
tbarronbswartz: ^^^ that's what bothers me about the metadata proposal, it makes it too easy to fork off a separate implementation even when the community agrees a new capability should be public, cross-vendor, etc.14:47
tbarronzhongjun_: I understand that it's the shortest path for you, it's just not really what we as a community said about those *squash* attributes14:48
zhongjun_It could be proposed in next version14:49
zhongjun_We will not use the metadata field in squash attributes stuff in open source manila version14:52
zhongjun_tbarron: the metadata proposal won’t relate to a new capability in open source version14:55
tbarronUnderstood.  My point is that putting metadata fields in and encouraging their use in non-open-source forks makes it14:59
tbarrontoo easy for vendors to do their own forked non-open-source implementations of features that *should* be14:59
tbarronpart of the open-source distro.14:59
tbarronThe open source distro loses energy and contributions that belong there.15:00
tbarronI agree however that some features are going to be needed just in forks and don't belong in the open source distro.15:00
tbarronHowever I think we as a community agreed at the Rocky PTG that the *squash* features were not in this last category.15:01
zhongjun_The access meatada is the same as share metadata data, it just used for tag something what user wants15:02
tbarronIt tags something the user wants and what they want is not implemented in the open source version of manila !15:03
tbarronzhongjun_: you talked the community into believing that what the user wants here is valuable, and15:04
tbarronnot valuable only to huawei cloud users.15:04
tbarronzhongjun_: maybe we need this as a topic for Thurs. meeting.15:04
zhongjun_sure15:06
*** caowei has quit IRC15:14
zhongjun_The metadata use case is the same as the share metadata use case. It’s not about aquash or some other stuff.15:20
zhongjun_It is not about huawei use case, it is community use case. The metadata Like: user:jdjhf  role:hdbbej.  Then you can easily to filter what access you want by name or role.15:22
zhongjun_I will add the separate feature about squash stuff later15:23
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-manila15:29
*** knylander has quit IRC15:59
*** knylander has joined #openstack-manila16:00
*** gouthamr has joined #openstack-manila16:05
*** dsariel has quit IRC16:31
*** e0ne has quit IRC16:40
*** gouthamr has quit IRC17:03
*** gouthamr has joined #openstack-manila17:12
*** gouthamr has quit IRC17:27
*** zhongjun_ has quit IRC17:46
*** cfey has quit IRC18:18
*** arnewiebalck_ has quit IRC18:28
*** lpetrut has joined #openstack-manila18:56
*** dsariel has joined #openstack-manila19:23
*** kaisers_ has joined #openstack-manila20:05
*** kaisers has quit IRC20:08
bswartztbarron: I agree it makes it easier to solve problems downstream, in a way that the solutions never go upstream20:56
bswartztbarron: the first part I like, but I agree the second part is a problem20:57
bswartztbarron: wrt to the specific stuff we discussed at PTG, I think the only cross-vendor compatible one we could find was the "priority" field for access rules20:58
bswartztbarron: for both all_squash and per-rule-qos, we found that it's not possible to implement in the core without some new capabilities20:59
*** a-pugachev has joined #openstack-manila21:00
*** kaisers_ has quit IRC21:01
*** lpetrut has quit IRC21:09
*** kaisers has joined #openstack-manila21:10
tbarronbswartz: I don't think we agreed per-rule-qos was at all suitable cross-vendor -- so hard to21:18
tbarronbswartz: define cross-vendor that we didn't even really talk about it21:19
tbarronbswartz: *squash on the other hand seemed to be almost a de facto standard, all but a few21:19
tbarronbswartz: back ends can do it (all the *nix based back ends likely support it) so that we thought21:20
tbarronbswartz: it a useful feature but yes, one that would require capabities since not all back ends support it21:20
tbarronbswartz: so it would be in there with replication, create from snapshot, mount from snapshot, etc.21:21
tbarronbswartz: not all back ends support these but they are useful and can their behavior can be21:21
tbarronbswartz: described in a public way21:22
tbarronbswartz: my issue here is that zhongjun spent a good bit of time arguing that *squash* is21:22
tbarronbswartz: a generally useful capability, persuaded the community, but now the proposal is to21:23
tbarronbswartz: handle the need for their customers only with the short-cut do-it-only-in-our-fork way21:23
tbarronbswartz: I won't block the metadata proposal but I will say that I think that I think this kind21:25
tbarronbswartz: of thing weakens the core open source project.21:25
tbarronbswartz: if we had been purists w.r.t. never allowing any capabilities that are not supportable by21:26
tbarronbswartz: *every* back end it would be a different matter; manila made a decision to go the other way21:26
tbarronbswartz: a long time ago and these capabilities seem as legitimate as the others we support21:26
*** gouthamr has joined #openstack-manila21:42
*** dsariel has quit IRC21:43
*** pcaruana has quit IRC21:54
*** kaisers has quit IRC22:00
*** kaisers has joined #openstack-manila22:10
*** kaisers has quit IRC22:14
*** a-pugachev has quit IRC22:24
*** kaisers has joined #openstack-manila22:30
*** arnewiebalck has quit IRC23:06
*** unznjlw has joined #openstack-manila23:12

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!