[OpenAFS] Re: [OpenAFS-devel] 1.6 and post-1.6 OpenAFS branch management and schedule
Christopher D. Clausen
Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:32:18 -0500
Rainer Toebbicke <email@example.com> wrote:
> Derrick Brashear schrieb:
>> Considering it a showstopper when you admit one graph earlier that
>> you're already running with a patched tree seems a bit overblown,
>> perhaps? The tree is now gold and patches may no longer be applied?
> No, of course not.
> It would be painful to have to put back the '--enable-fast-restart and
> --enable-bitmap-later' code if you removed them, probably dangerous. My
> plea is to keep them in as an alternative to the demand-attach
> file-server: with mandatory salvaging the non-demand-attach case is
> seriously impaired, hence disabling it is no real alternative.
> With the ambitious schedule for new releases I see this happening very
> quickly. I'd like to avoid having to stop at a particular release next
> year because of a functionality that we manage to live without, and miss
> others that we're interested in.
I agree with Rainer on this.
At the same time, I'd be happy to start doing more testing of the various
DAFS features, although I'm not quite sure what version I should be using
for testing, nor am I completely sure how to actually migrate an existing
file server to use DAFS or if there is a reverse path to downgrade if I