From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: jerasure packaging and Ceph Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2015 21:27:43 +0200 Message-ID: <55C506AF.4080309@dachary.org> References: <55C4EA1C.3080601@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1e1WaDrevO7JlmuoN2Wb0Mj4hckXB15IQ" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:35038 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1945960AbbHGT1r (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2015 15:27:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <55C4EA1C.3080601@redhat.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ken Dreyer , "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --1e1WaDrevO7JlmuoN2Wb0Mj4hckXB15IQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ken, On 07/08/2015 19:25, Ken Dreyer wrote: > Hi Loic, >=20 > I was looking through Ceph's bundled libraries recently and I was > wondering why Ceph bundles its own copy of jerasure. >=20 > Could you give some background on that? Why don't we link to an separat= e > system package? Mainly because there is no proper non regression testing of the packages = found in the distributions. It is absolutely critical for Ceph to ensure = there is no regression because it would mean data loss. The packagers do = not have that concern in mind right now, nor do they have the infrastruct= ure to run non regression tests, to the best of my knowledge. Even if they had non regression tests, whenever a new package is publishe= d, we would need to run Ceph integration tests before it lands in the dis= tribution repositories to ensure that everything is fine from the Ceph pe= rspective. The recent work with teuthology and OpenStack simplified this = quite a lot and anyone can run teuthology now. However the level of coord= ination it would require between the jerasure packager and the ceph packa= ger is far from what is going on currently. I offered to package jerasure for Debian to solve that problem in the Deb= ian / Ubuntu realm. I thought a first step to decouple ceph from jerasure= could be that I care for jerasure because I have access to the test infr= astructure and I understand what Ceph needs. And I could gradually make i= t possible for any packager to do the same, somehow (I have no idea how t= o do that, honestly). Unfortunately the person responsible for packaging = jerasure did not respond favorably to my offer. Nor does he plan to imple= ment integration or non regression tests. Hopefully that will change in the future, but for now I think bundling je= rasure with Ceph is the best way to preserve the data of our users. Cheers >=20 > - Ken >=20 --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --1e1WaDrevO7JlmuoN2Wb0Mj4hckXB15IQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlXFBq8ACgkQ8dLMyEl6F23IEgCgrUUic4DfPeJKOVJkGoRqIkKE OBsAoJIKaM8Z6/VAc3L7xu/Xqn5FpkuB =eZdU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1e1WaDrevO7JlmuoN2Wb0Mj4hckXB15IQ--