On Dec 21, 2017, at 1:00 PM, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > > That's where the NAS and sshfs came into play.
You seem to be trying to use containers and such to provide distributed service, but Fossil already does that: it’s a DVCS. There’s no one telling you it must live in only one place. Therefore: Option 1: Run the container anywhere you like, but with its internal Fossil storing to the container’s view of the host OS, not to some other machine over a network file system. Then from another computer, clone that repository onto the SAN or NAS. Periodically, run a sync. Now your repo is both in the container and on the NAS/SAN. Option 2: If the NAS permits, run a Fossil instance there. Clone it into the container for actual use. Whether syncs mostly go first to the container or to the NAS and are then pushed to the other doesn’t much matter. Again, think distributed. Either way, Fossil get a local real POSIX-compliant file system for SQLite, and uses its own sync protocol for inter-host operations, which means that SQLite transactions end up avoiding the need to worry about network unreliability. The clone/push will either complete successfully or it will be wholly rolled back to the prior safe state. > I'm sure fossil won't be the only service > in that category - I just started with fossil because I *thought* it would be > an > easy win. Any DBMS is going to have problems with sshfs. It’s not something special to SQLite. If you mean to reference VCSes competing with Fossil, it’s at best a “push” (in the poker sense) when it comes to networked data reliability with your current storage design, simply because reliable storage in the face of multiple writers requires correct locking. Switching to another VCS may even make things worse. Fossil looks like it is causing problems here, but only because it’s trying to do things in an ACID-compliant fashion, where other systems might not even try, and so *appear* to be less problem-free. I’ve tried researching Git ACID compliance and concurrency, and all I see is raw speculation, no hard claims from people who actually know what they’re talking about, and have battle-tested it. SQLite, by contrast, is very well known to be a durable data store…*if* you put it on a filesystem with correct locking semantics! _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
