From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Feb 5 5:54:46 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9058537B401 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 05:54:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from haldjas.folklore.ee (Haldjas.folklore.ee [193.40.6.121]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC8843FC1 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 05:54:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee) Received: from haldjas.folklore.ee (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by haldjas.folklore.ee (8.12.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h15DsJOs006579; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 15:54:19 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee) Received: from localhost (narvi@localhost) by haldjas.folklore.ee (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) with ESMTP id h15DruW5006565; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 15:53:57 +0200 (EET) Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 15:53:56 +0200 (EET) From: Narvi To: "Matthew N. Dodd" Cc: "Brandon D. Valentine" , David Gilbert , Subject: Re: Network block device. In-Reply-To: <20030129185154.U8642@sasami.jurai.net> Message-ID: <20030205153754.O43637-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Matthew N. Dodd wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Brandon D. Valentine wrote: > > IMO NBD is less of a hack than you think it is. It is one of the > > necessary components for creating a single system image from a cluster > > of commodity hardware and this is something Linux developers are working > > earnestly on. They're targeting a poor man's NUMA. > > Sorry, it still sounds dumb. > > They should really look at Sprite. (And anyone thats doing clustering and > not looking at VMS deserves what they get.) > > On a real cluster running a single image all all the drives would just > show up. There wouldn't be any hacking going on. Stuff like this kind of > requires 64 bit machines to be at all useful. > Only as long as only clusters with some level of single system image (for various values of it) are allowed to be real clusters. But calling NBD a necessary component of a single system image is very probably wrong - its almost at cross purposes to getting to a single system image cluster. NBD is neither needed (you could use say transaction based function shipping for one example) nor sufficent. > -- > | Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD | > | winter@jurai.net | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,pmax | > | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | For Great Justice! | ISO8802.5 4ever | > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message