Sam Lang wrote:
On Feb 20, 2007, at 2:09 AM, Murali Vilayannur wrote:
Hi Sam,
I think in general a lot more effort is made to get the kernel module
working properly than the client tools (pvfs2-*).
Is this really true? All the pvfs2-* tools use the same set of SMs as
client-core, no?
(unless of course there is a bug in the pvfs2-*.c file?).
Hi Murali, its the tools themselves I was referring to in my comment.
That being said,
we don't discourage the use of the client tools, they just don't get
as much pounding, and they aren't written to match the functionality
that the VFS provides.
Hmm.. if this is indeed the case, then we could get the posix like
library API that Brad developed into shape and use LD_PRELOAD to run
the nightlies?
Good idea!
ech.
_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-users
