On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 at 10:33:44PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
- read-only mount
- specatator mount (like ro but no journal allocated for the mount,
no fencing needed for failed node that was mounted as specatator)
I'd call it real-read-only, and yes, that's very usefull
mount.
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:35:23PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
+void gfs2_glock_hold(struct gfs2_glock *gl)
+{
+ glock_hold(gl);
+}
eh why?
On 9/5/05, David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You removed the comment stating exactly why, see below. If that's not a
accepted
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We export our full dlm API through read/write/poll on a misc device.
inotify did that for a while, but we ended up going with a straight syscall
interface.
How fat is the dlm interface? ie: how many syscalls would it take?
-
To unsubscribe from this
On Mon, 5 September 2005 11:47:39 +0800, David Teigland wrote:
Joern already suggested moving this out of line and into a function (as it
was before) to avoid repeating string constants. In that case the
function, file and line from BUG aren't useful. We now have this, does it
look ok?
Ok
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We export our full dlm API through read/write/poll on a misc device.
inotify did that for a while, but we ended up going with a straight syscall
interface.
How fat is the dlm
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We export our full dlm API through read/write/poll on a misc device.
inotify did that for a while, but we ended up going with a straight
On Monday 05 September 2005 05:19, Andrew Morton wrote:
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We export our full dlm API through read/write/poll on a misc device.
inotify did
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 02:19:48AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Four functions:
create_lockspace()
release_lockspace()
lock()
unlock()
Neat. I'd be inclined to make them syscalls then. I don't suppose anyone
is likely to object if we
On 2005-09-03T01:57:31, Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only current users of dlms are cluster filesystems. There are zero users
of the userspace dlm api.
That is incorrect, and you're contradicting yourself here:
What does have to be resolved is a common API for node
On Monday 05 September 2005 10:14, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2005-09-03T01:57:31, Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only current users of dlms are cluster filesystems. There are zero
users of the userspace dlm api.
That is incorrect...
Application users Lars, sorry if I did
On Monday 05 September 2005 10:49, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2005 10:14, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2005-09-03T01:57:31, Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only current users of dlms are cluster filesystems. There are zero
users of the userspace dlm api.
On Sad, 2005-09-03 at 21:46 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Actually I think it's rather sick. Taking O_NONBLOCK and making it a
lock-manager trylock because they're kinda-sorta-similar-sounding? Spare
me. O_NONBLOCK means open this file in nonblocking mode, not attempt to
acquire a clustered
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 05:24:33PM +0800, David Teigland wrote:
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We export our full dlm API through read/write/poll on a misc device.
inotify did that for a while, but we ended
Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Llu, 2005-09-05 at 02:19 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
create_lockspace()
release_lockspace()
lock()
unlock()
Neat. I'd be inclined to make them syscalls then. I don't suppose anyone
is likely to object if we reserve those
Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Llu, 2005-09-05 at 12:53 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
- How are they ref counted
- What are the cleanup semantics
- How do I pass a lock between processes (AF_UNIX sockets wont work now)
- How do I poll on a lock coming free.
- What
On Monday 05 September 2005 12:18, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2005 10:49, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2005 10:14, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2005-09-03T01:57:31, Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only current users of dlms are cluster
On Monday 05 September 2005 22:03, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2005 19:57, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2005 12:18, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2005 10:49, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2005 10:14, Lars Marowsky-Bree
On Monday 05 September 2005 23:02, Daniel Phillips wrote:
By the way, you said alpha server not alpha servers, was that just a
slip?
Because if you don't have a cluster then why are you using a dlm?
No, it is not a slip. The application is running on just one node, so we
do not really
On Tuesday 06 September 2005 00:07, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2005 23:02, Daniel Phillips wrote:
By the way, you said alpha server not alpha servers, was that just a
slip? Because if you don't have a cluster then why are you using a dlm?
No, it is not a slip. The
19 matches
Mail list logo
