Just for my own amusement, if you could only have a process in one PAG space, then how would comething like: mv /nfs/somefile /afs/mycell/newfile
work? On Sat, 2004-02-21 at 16:46, Derek Atkins wrote: > Jim Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > No. Arla, Coda and OpenAFS all use the same interfaces at least, already, > > so it's just a question of what nfsv4 is doing, or does. > > > > NFSv4 does not yet have pags. When it does, we'd like to use whatever > > OpenAFS uses for managing them. It would be nice to have something cleaner > > than the current "magic grouplist" to keep track of them. > > > > It would also be nice if linux, bsd, and everyone else could agree on a > > common interface, and on common semantics. This turns out to be kind of a > > big job, which is one reason we haven't taken a stab at this yet. > > Question: is it a reasonable to want a process to be in "AFS PAG 1" > and "NFS PAG 2"? Or is it safe to assume that all file systems > share the PAG space? > > -derek _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
