Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 08:37:17 -0600 From: Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com> To: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de> Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net>, FreeBSD virtualization <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: NFS alternatives (was: Re: Storage overhead on zvols) Message-ID: <CA%2BtpaK07BqQdXtWUbjoGyuNHxJeb1enT%2Bmb49tdpM2RYEfLXqQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4A321A55-23FA-42AB-BF65-3DCA3464307D@punkt.de> References: <201712051641.vB5GfR5I052310@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> <4A321A55-23FA-42AB-BF65-3DCA3464307D@punkt.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Patrick M. Hausen <hausen@punkt.de> wrote: > Hi all, > > > Am 05.12.2017 um 17:41 schrieb Rodney W. Grimes < > freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>: > > In effect what your asking for is what NFS does, so use NFS and get > > over the fact that this is the way to get what you want. Sure you > > could implement a virt-vfs but I wonder how close the spec of that > > would be to the spec of NFS. > > I figure it should be possible to implement something simpler > than NFS that provides full local posix semantics under the > constraint that only one "client" is allowed to mount the FS > at a time. > > I see quite a few applications for something like this, specifically > in "hyperconvergent" environments. Or vagrant, of course. > > *scratching head* isn't this what Sun's "network disk" protocol provided? > > Kind regards, > Patrick Like this? https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/geom-ggate.html -- Adam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BtpaK07BqQdXtWUbjoGyuNHxJeb1enT%2Bmb49tdpM2RYEfLXqQ>