LWG Minutes 2017-04-20

From OpenSFS
Revision as of 06:10, 3 May 2017 by Spitzcor (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


Cray: Cory Spitz, Ben Evans, Justin Miller, Patrick Farrell
ORNL: James Simmons, Dustin Leverman
Sandia: Ruth Klundt
IU: Ken Rawlings
Globus: Rick Wagner
Intel: Andreas Dilger, Joe Gmitter, Peter Jones


New Actions Captured:

  • None

Existing Open Actions:

  • None

Actions Recently Closed:

  • None


2.10 Release Update

  • We are closing out on features, hoping to officially reach feature freeze in the next few days.
  • Cory is pushing forward the NRS delay policy, since this is an enhancement of an existing feature and may land after FF.
  • Lock Ahead missed the feature freeze cutoff and will be deferred to 2.11.
    • A lengthy discussion was held on this topic regarding the reasoning behind deferring to 2.11. The take away is to improve communication between the developer and the LWG by bringing any concerns regarding feature status to this forum ahead of established deadlines if there is any uncertainty of where work stands.
  • Oleg will be doing a new tag in the next day or two.
  • Ben: Ben has been working on been working on a jobid patch and pushing forward Frank Zago's hsm patches. Are these eleiglbe for landing up after feature freeze?
    • Peter: Yes, these are not features. These are performance enhancements to existing work and eligible for landing consideration.

Lustre Roadmap

  • We are looking to update the general roadmap slide on lustre.org and asking for input from this group.
  • Cory: Let’s put Lock Ahead back on for the 2.11 list
  • Peter: All that we have drawn up for 2.12 at the moment is FLR resync. Are there any ideas of any other features in the 2.12 timeframe that makes sense to list?
    • James: tracepoint can be realistically added for 2.11
    • Andreas: We should list LNet Dynamic Discovery for 2.11 and LNet Health for 2.12.
  • Dustin: How far off is client for landing in upstream?
    • Andreas: Oleg has been talking with Al Viro. We have some further work to do before Greg would look at it.
    • Dustin: It might be good to put something on the roadmap for the upstream client if we could represent it accurately.

Upstream Lustre Client

  • Cory: What does success look like at this point? Do we have confidence that we will be able to make it in?
    • Peter: Success really is about getting out of staging for the kernel that RHEL is using (other distros would be more flexible).
      • James: Agreed. We are far ahead of SLES.
    • James: I was hoping we could be out of staging this summer, but it seems like an in depth review really won’t happen for some time.
    • James: i have some concern about LNet since they have mentioned that they would like to see LNet on top of netlink.
      • Andreas: I see this as wholly impractical as LNet is a large factor in lustre being fast.
      • James: Agreed and this would be a massive undertaking.
      • Andreas: The amount of changes we had to do for LNet for TCP/IP is almost non-existent. I think this is something we really have to push back on.
      • James: Agreed, the other stuff is all reasonable for us to do but this one doesn't make a whole lot of sense.


  • We have had some challenges with hosting provider and have been working on resolving that.
  • We have finished old FAQ review, will be integrating it.
  • We have been discussing the internals update project and keeping momentum up.

Other Business

  • Peter: OpenSFS survey. We had a lower number of respondents from previous years. The main change in the data is a shift in of the number of 2.5 sites (dropped a bit) and the number of current releases being used (an uptick). The other thing that was nice to see was a grouping of responses asking for features that are already in for 2.10 (PFL and Project Quotas). Peter will present on this data at LUG.
  • Peter: LUG Developer Day. Some people didn't seem to get the developer day information reliably.
    • Peter: Have the Cray engineers received the info now?
      • Cory: Yes and we will get some candidates registered.
    • Peter: Is there anything Cray was was hoping to cover, any particular topics?
      • Cory: Not quite sure yet, will get back to Peter.
  • Peter LUG Hackathon: It would be good to have people there that are able to help new volunteers that are looking to start developing.

Next meeting will be on 2017-05-04 at 11:00am Pacific