On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 09:16:25 AM Jakub Kruszona-Zawadzki wrote:
> > This is unfair to suggest that LizardFS do not strive to have reliable
> > product.
>
> Maybe they want, but they do not have it. Number of issues in they github
> is huge (of course since we do not have public bug track we can't compare
> :) )
Number of bugs is not a metric of quality. Remember that bugs are also items
on developers' TO DO list.
I reported more LizardFS bugs than anyone else (up to 100) and I'm using
LizardFS because it survived vigorous testing. Bugs are also different: some
are feature requests, some are not critical for data integrity etc.
I'm not aware of release-critical bugs without fix but of course there might
be some.
> Hence I'm in favour of LizardFS.
>
> I hope that it will change some day. Did you even try to test MooseFS 3.0?
> Compare to LizardFS?
So far I've seen no compelling reasons to switch away from LizardFS - not
until MooseFS become more open. At the moment IMHO LizardFS is the only
choice (and GfarmFS is close second). Also I have no time to try MooseFS.
Maybe one day I'll try it but I'll have to justify the effort...
> If you need PRO licence to do some test then let me know - We will send it.
Thank you for your kind offer but no. :) I will only evaluate what's free and
suitable for Debian.
> Simple example of LizardFS wrongdoings. First change they made was to
> accept chunks with bigger version than version set in master. Chunk
> version mismatch was in this case for a reason. This can lead to
> acceptance chunk with wrong data inside. They change it because there were
> problems with version synchronization (problem originated from original
> MooseFS). To fix that you should fix synchronization, not just accept
> everything.
Interesting, thank you.
> Maybe because huge part of our users are also Debian users and you may want
> to make their life easier.
Makes sense.
> I don't know if you are aware of this or not, but
> we have in Poland new government chosen in democratic poll, and they are
> just ... stupid (horribly stupid and radical).
I feel your pain. I feel ashamed of our Australian government. :(
Popularity polls are poor foundation for decision making. But as Winston
Churchill once said, "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of
government except all the others that have been tried."...
> I didn't know that. Can you help us to improve that (I understand that you
> do not have time and don't want to involve, but maybe there is some
> documentation, some hints - how to improve that)?
Here you can find some generic links to documents describing packaging for
Debian:
http://mentors.debian.net/qa
Lintian checks (including pedantic and experimental ones) provide useful
hints for areas that can benefit from improvements.
Also you can refer to official LizardFS packaging which have numerous
improvements over "upstream" packaging:
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/lizardfs.git
Feel free to ask questions in mentor's mail list. If you CC to me I'll try to
answer as well if time allows.
> This is your decision who you are helping. If you believe in them then help
> them, but at least try not to be against us. I'm still inventor of MooseFS
> and I hope that I still make a good job with MooseFS.
I'm not agains you or MooseFS. Even though at the moment I'm in favour of
LizardFS I'm sure LizardFS would not be where it is now without solid
foundation of MooseFS.
--
All the best,
Dmitry Smirnov.
---
Odious ideas are not entitled to hide from criticism behind the human
shield of their believers' feelings.
-- Richard Stallman
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.