On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 15:33:02 -0400
Dale Pontius pont...@btv.ibm.com wrote:
Obviously this was client side, but I find it hard to believe that
keeping a connection mapped for the 2 hours mentioned elsewhere would
be necessary.
Maybe not necessary, but at least in the past it was possible for
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 12:46 -0500, Andrew Deason wrote:
On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 15:33:02 -0400
Dale Pontius pont...@btv.ibm.com wrote:
Obviously this was client side, but I find it hard to believe that
keeping a connection mapped for the 2 hours mentioned elsewhere would
be necessary.
On Tue, 05 Aug 2014 16:12:41 +0200
Alex euergetiko...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/05/14 15:08, Brandon Allbery wrote:
So you might be able to get by with just running fs checkvolumes
periodically in a cron job to make up for missing callback breaks on
volume releases.
That only refreshes the
On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 10:36 -0500, Andrew Deason wrote:
On Tue, 05 Aug 2014 16:12:41 +0200
Alex euergetiko...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/05/14 15:08, Brandon Allbery wrote:
So you might be able to get by with just running fs checkvolumes
periodically in a cron job to make up for missing
On 08/05/14 17:36, Andrew Deason wrote:
On Tue, 05 Aug 2014 16:12:41 +0200
Alex euergetiko...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
Thank you all for answering, I guess we should test it more carefully
to check how it will work. Parallel access is a must for us.The main
concern is the possibility that
On 5 Aug 2014, at 17:21, Alex euergetiko...@gmail.com wrote:
yes, what I meant is that I need the client to be aware that some other
client is editing, (and refresh the cache), which is the function of
callback if I am not mistaken. As I understand, this is not possible
behind a NAT
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 15:39:48 +
Brandon Allbery ballb...@sinenomine.net wrote:
On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 10:36 -0500, Andrew Deason wrote:
On 08/05/14 15:08, Brandon Allbery wrote:
So you might be able to get by with just running fs
checkvolumes periodically in a cron job to make up for
