On Thursday 28 April 2005 08:21, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2005-04-27T22:41:04, Daniel Phillips <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Just a couple comments here, more will come as time permits. I know you
> > > consider cluster file systems to be "obscure" apps...
> >
> > Oh the contrary, cluster filesystems are the main focus of and reason for
> > the current submission.
>
> He was actually quoting David. And indeed it is very important that the
> DLM interfaces be generally useful, not just for a specific cluster
> filesystem; if that was the goal, it would be an internal component only
> and no need to expose it.
True, sort of. Remember, the _only_ argument for (g)dlm being in-kernel is to
tighten up the interface for filesystems. If (g)dlm could be trimmed down by
supporting _only_ in-kernel filesystems, with a different, userspace lock
manager for user space apps, well, that is a strategy that has to be
considered.
Taking part of (g)dlm out of kernel is also something that needs to be looked
it. It is a little on the biggish side.
Don't forget, (g)dlm is just a cluster service, and at present, a service that
has exactly one user in the whole world: gfs. We'd like to attract more, but
not at the cost of kernel bloat.
Regards,
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
