Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: GFS requirements (was: Non-GPL export of invalidate_mmap_range) | Date | Sat, 21 Feb 2004 14:09:13 -0500 |
| |
On Saturday 21 February 2004 09:17, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > On 2004-02-20T22:16:09, I said: > > Each DFS is free to implement its own infrastructure, possibly involving > > kernel extensions. > > Yes. Though I do reserve the right to find this highly silly, that we > might end up with multiple hooks for clustering infrastructure in the > kernel...
But the one true clustering infrastructure hasn't been developed yet. The upcoming crop of designs need a chance to evolve before a framework is cast in stone. Perhaps we will eventually end up with a generic harness, something like a vfs for cluster infrastructure, but in my opinion, we're far from being able to define that sensibly now. It's better to implement exactly what a given DFS needs for the time being.
> So, how does OpenGFS/GFS achieve the communication? How does it interact > with the infrastructure (which, I infere from your above comments, is > meant to reside in user-space)?
It's done both ways, actually. No new kernel hooks are used in either case.
Regards,
Daniel
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |