I like the idea of specifying aliases rather than handle ranges, etc.,
if that is feasible. I also agree that we want this interface to allow
this specification at create time, but then we want to use our existing
scheme for long-term metadata storage (e.g. just keep the handles).
Regards,
Rob
Julian Martin Kunkel wrote:
Hi,
In general like the proposed solution better than the current, but an
extension which allows the distribution to see the aliases of the servers
would be neat as well. This certainly would solve the issue of placing
datafiles.
Julian, how would this stuff fit in with your migration/hints stuff?
I use the actual server aliases as targets to ensure proper placing of the
datafiles in an environment with miscellaneous sets of dataservers.
In my opinion a decoupled system for file creation and the distribution
parameters seems important to allow later relocation of datafiles to another
data servers without conflicting with the distribution parameters. Therefore,
the location of the datafiles should be transparent for the distribution and
never be set in the distribution parameters itself. Another reason not to
store this info in the distribution parameters is that once the target
dataservers are determined this information
simply becomes obsolete.
Julian
_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
