Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 19:39:56 -0500 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: "Steven P. Donegan" <donegan@quick.net>, Christian Kuhtz <ck@ns1.adsu.bellsouth.com>, Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Josh Tiefenbach <josh@ican.net>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NOW/MOSIX/Beowulf Message-ID: <29073.915064796@gjp.erols.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 30 Dec 1998 19:34:36 EST." <28977.915064476@gjp.erols.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Gary Palmer" wrote in message ID <28977.915064476@gjp.erols.com>: > "Steven P. Donegan" wrote in message ID > <Pine.BSI.3.91.981230153706.24396A-100000@oldnews.quick.net>: > > The farm of FreeBSD front ends would talk to an NFS backend (like a > > Network Appliance) so 'where' you commit your writes would be a moot point. > > Sharing LDAP caches like that doesn't work. Whoops. Guess I should say a bit more about *why* shouldn't I? If you think about it, each LDAP `replica' (even if they share the same DBM backend over NFS, and you could find an LDAP server which supported read-only operation like that), you still could run into troubles. Since each replica has in-core state about the file, have differet replicas write different updates to different parts of the file could lead to some interesting results ... even with good file/record locking, I think that is a path full of risk. Gary -- Gary Palmer FreeBSD Core Team Member FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/ for info To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?29073.915064796>