On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 20:12 -0700, Chakri n wrote:
> Thanks Trond, for clarifying this for me.
>
> I have seen similar behavior when a remote NFS server is not
> available. Many processes wait end up waiting in nfs_release_page. So,
> what will happen if the remote server is not available,
> nfs_release_page cannot free the memory since it waits on rpc request
> to complete, which never completes and processes wait in there for
> ever?
>
> And unfortunately in my case, I cannot use "mount --bind". I want to
> use the same file system from two different nodes, and I want file &
> record locking to be consistent. The only way to make sure locking is
> consistent is to use loopback NFS on 1 host and NFS mount the same
> file system on other nodes, so that NFS server ensures file & record
> locking to be consistent. Is there any alternative to this?
>
> Is it possible or any efforts to integrate ext3 or other local file
> systems locking & network file system locking, so that user can use
> "mount --bind" on local host and NFS mount on remote nodes, but file &
> record locking will be consistent between both the nodes?
Could you be a bit more specific? Is the problem that your application
is using BSD locks (flock()) instead of POSIX locks?
Cheers
Trond
-
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]
