On Sep 03, 2002 14:26 -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> > > Your approach is not feasible.
> >
> > But you have to be specific about why not. I've responded to the
> > particular objections so far.
>
> You make it sound like you bet your masters degree on
> doing a distributed filesystem without filesystem support ;)
Actually, we are using ext3 pretty much as-is for our backing-store
for Lustre. The same is true of InterMezzo, and NFS, for that matter.
All of them live on top of a standard "local" filesystem, which doesn't
know the things that happen above it to make it a network filesystem
(locking, etc).
That isn't to say that I agree with just taking a local filesystem and
putting it on a shared block device and expecting it to work with only
the normal filesystem code. We do all of our locking above the fs
level, but we do have some help in the VFS (intent-based lookup, patch
in the Lustre CVS repository, if people are interested).
Cheers, Andreas
-- Andreas Dilger http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/- 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 22:00:18 EST