Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:00:33 +0100 From: Andy Sporner <sporner@nentec.de> To: Clifton Royston <cliftonr@lava.net>, freebsd-cluster <freebsd-cluster@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: sharing files within a cluster Message-ID: <3DF85E41.7090202@nentec.de> References: <200212101257.gBACvv609153@splat.grant.org> <3DF5EB88.9090409@nentec.de> <20021210145615.20975.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here> <3DF60768.7040407@nentec.de> <20021211153209.B25854@lava.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Clifton Royston wrote: >On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 04:25:28PM +0100, Andy Sporner wrote: > > >>> I might be saying something foolish but have any of you investigated >>>GEOM? It might be possible to write an abstraction layer for it that will >>>enable some of the necessary features: >>> >>> - localization transparency >>> - distribution >>> - disconnected mode >>> - blabla... unfortunaly, FreeBSD based only as GEOM is only >>> supported for FreeBSD for now >>> >>> >>> >>> >>This is the main 'gotcha'. The secondary one is that this guy has >>never replied to *any* of my emails and with all the difficulties >>related to time, I simply don't have any more to deal with that as >>well... :-( >> >> > > He's a busy guy too. Read the freebsd-current list if you want to >see what's going on there; PHK is one of the frequent posters, as GEOM >is now a fundamental component of FreeBSD 5.x. > > I can understand. It's hard sometimes to tell the difference between people who are genuinely busy or those that have depreciated list members because of some narrow interpretation of what somebody might have said. I don't proofread my emails and often there are fragments missing that would change the meaning of things ;-) Normally if people follow the complete conversation they get the right idea. > > >>I am trying to make this a *bsd neutral environment. This way everybody >>wins. But thanks >>for your opinion... >> >> > > I don't see other OSes necessarily adopting GEOM, even though it seems >like a sound design. It's an "architectural-underpinnings" type of >software, and nobody is going to switch to it until they start feeling >that what they have is seriously broken or deficient. All IMHO. > Though I might be speaking sacrilege here, I rather like the way the windows/NT has a uniform disk access layer. Though they sort of blew it on their "uniform" network layer. Abstraction layers always are nice to make platform independant things. But they have to be on all platforms in order to be a platform independant solution. As you say, it isn't. I suppose if Intel was to get behind it (like ACPIO) it would be a standard. With all of the historic in-fighting within the various BSD's this is a bigger chalange then to get a driver source adopted by Linus for the Linux Kernel. also IMHO. --Andy To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-cluster" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3DF85E41.7090202>