Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 17:23:03 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: bright@wintelcom.net (Alfred Perlstein) Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: interface ideas for async locks? Message-ID: <200005171723.KAA05756@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.9912210428380.12109-100000@fw.wintelcom.net> from "Alfred Perlstein" at Dec 21, 1999 04:41:33 AM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I've gotten started on making async fcntl locks possible, the trick is > giving preference to async locks and having lock reservations put up > by the process that 'unblocks' the async lock. > > Anyhow, the reason for this mail is to get an idea of what type of > interface people would like for this feature. I would like to see it mirror the opportunity locking interface that SAMBA currently expects. This is similar to the NFSv3 LEASE idea. It is important to support opportunity locks; not for performance reasons, but because SAMBA is effectively a user space hosted OS, and this type of interface is necessary for supporting hosted OS vs. hosting OS coherency. In plain English, this means that SAMBA will respect locks held by UNIX applications, and vice versa. You might as well get SAMBA (and IRIX, and soon to be Linux) compatability with this interface for free. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200005171723.KAA05756>