Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 09:08:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Simon Shapiro <Shimon@i-Connect.Net> To: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Features - invitation to comment Message-ID: <XFMail.970429174652.Shimon@i-Connect.Net> In-Reply-To: <199704290644.XAA02193@rah.star-gate.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Amancio Hasty; On 29-Apr-97 you wrote: > > Well, > > > This sort of thing reminds me of VMS clusters merged with NFS. Sort of. Maybe. We are focusing now on block/raw devices. File systems are to be done later. Not a priority yet. > At first glance , I see the need for redundancy / mirroring . Also, > the access time or weight for a given host block. Ability to migrate > work load to different system on demand. This is good. Does anyone have any access to the Mariposa project at Berkeley? > Does the system implements caching : write behind or read ahead? Open issue. not at the moment as first application does synchronous writes (commit logs). > Also I would like to hear a little bit more on the distributed > lock manager and how does it handle failure cases or what happens > if the host where the application is running dies. More details will be forthcoming. Every ``owner'' has a co-owner. Every pair holds mutual dead-man switches and boradcast the death of a co-owner. > Perhaps, is best if the system address "virtual hosts/block" so if > a system goes down requests can continue on a mirroring system. Yes. See above. Simon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.970429174652.Shimon>