Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:37247 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752020AbbAHUyW (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2015 15:54:22 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 15:54:20 -0500 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: Jeff Layton Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/18] nfsd: pNFS block layout driver Message-ID: <20150108205420.GF14674@fieldses.org> References: <1420561721-9150-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1420561721-9150-15-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20150106171658.GD12067@fieldses.org> <20150106173957.GA16200@lst.de> <20150106193949.GD28003@fieldses.org> <20150106114205.4151269c@synchrony.poochiereds.net> <20150107102802.GA28783@lst.de> <20150108124131.4dc27026@synchrony.poochiereds.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20150108124131.4dc27026@synchrony.poochiereds.net> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 12:41:31PM -0800, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 11:28:02 +0100 > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 11:42:05AM -0800, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > Or maybe an "on" switch? > > > > > > We have some patches (not posted currently) that add a "pnfs" export > > > option. Maybe we should add that and only enable pnfs on exports that > > > have that option present? > > > > I would defintively prefer the off switch. I can add one if people want > > it, but export options are a little annoying as they require support > > not only in the kernel but also in nfs-utils. > > True, it is a pain, but I think it's realistic to expect someone who > wants to do pnfs to have an updated nfs-utils. It wouldn't take too > long for it to trickle out to the various distros and adding new export > options is fairly simple to do. > > If we do want to go that route, it might be nice to do the option with > a list of layout types. For example: > > pnfs=block:file:flexfiles > > ...so we could potentially support more than one layout type per > export. I like the goal of making this as close to zero-configuration as possible, and I'd rather wait for a demonstrated need till we add per-export or multiple-layout-type configuration. A global off switch sounds OK to me. --b.