From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 27 04:12:23 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB8016A41C for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 04:12:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48ADA43D48 for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 04:12:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.14] (imini.samsco.home [192.168.254.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j4R4EI8E046894; Thu, 26 May 2005 22:14:18 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <42969DD8.4060701@samsco.org> Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 22:11:04 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andre Guibert de Bruet References: <4295D51F.50106@centtech.com> <429606D9.6080602@cs.tu-berlin.de> <42960ACB.7090801@cs.tu-berlin.de> <42960CFE.4060307@centtech.com> <42960F8F.2050109@samsco.org> <42961195.30608@centtech.com> <429613FB.80100@samsco.org> <42968AD4.3020603@centtech.com> <4296997C.9030700@samsco.org> <20050527000105.E54386@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> In-Reply-To: <20050527000105.E54386@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: FreeBSD Current , "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC" Subject: Re: Disable read/write caching to disk? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 04:12:24 -0000 Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: > > On Thu, 26 May 2005, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: > >> Agreed, but as you say, FreeBSD is not there yet, and since the OP is >> on FreeBSD, and wants to have multiple computers attached, NFS would >> be one way of making that happen. And if you leave the other >> computers attached by the FC but not mounted, if on goes down, you can >> replace it with another, and switch your nfs server over. Not as >> ideal but doable on FreeBSD. > > > This hack would not be suitable in an HA environment -- It requires > human intervention or some really fugly scripts not just for the NFS > server, but also for the clients. These scripts would have to figure out > how to recover NFS file locking state and consistency when the backup > machine fails over. > > It seems as if NFS in this type of setup introduces more problems than > it solves. > > Andy > So what we need is some manpower. I estimate that a proof-of-concept port of GFS would take about 4-6 solid months. There is also a volume management aspect to GFS, but that is less important and the existing GEOM classes can largely fill the role already. Anyone interested in taking a serious look at it? Scott