From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 27 05:36:33 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493011065670 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:36:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-current@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 069F28FC1E for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:36:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-current@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Jekmm-0004CW-7x for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:36:24 +0000 Received: from 195.208.174.178 ([195.208.174.178]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:36:24 +0000 Received: from vadim_nuclight by 195.208.174.178 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:36:24 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Vadim Goncharov Followup-To: gmane.os.freebsd.current Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:36:15 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Nuclear Lightning @ Tomsk, TPU AVTF Hostel Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <47E9448F.1010304@ipfw.ru> <20080326142115.K34007@fledge.watson.org> X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.208.174.178 X-Comment-To: Robert Watson User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (FreeBSD) Sender: news Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: unionfs status X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: vadim_nuclight@mail.ru List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:36:33 -0000 Hi Robert Watson! On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:53:25 +0000 (GMT); Robert Watson wrote about 'Re: unionfs status': > You can imagine a number of schemes to replicate pointer changes around or > track the various outstanding references, but I think a more fundamental > question is whether this is in fact the right behavior at all. The premise of > is that writes flow up, but not down, and "connections" to sockets are > read-write events, not read events, most typically. If you're using unionfs > to take a template system and "broadcast it" to many jails, you probably don't > want all the jails talking to the same syslogd, you want them each talking to > their own. When syslogd in a jail finds a disconnected socket, which is > effectively what a NULL v_socket pointer means, in /var/run/log, it should be > unlinking it and creating a new socket, not reusing the existing file on disk. This code's use in jails is primarily intended for mysql (and the like daemons), not syslogd (for which you said it right). Such daemons really require broadcasting, yep - so unionfs should support it... -- WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#166852181 mailto:vadim_nuclight@mail.ru [Moderator of RU.ANTI-ECOLOGY][FreeBSD][http://antigreen.org][LJ:/nuclight]