[Cluster-devel] Re: [NFS] [PATCH 3/4 Revised] NLM - kernel lockd-statd changes

[Olaf Kirch <okir@lst.de>]

On Friday 13 April 2007 21:16, Lon Hohberger wrote:
> The simplification here is a bit incorrect; we need to be able to handle
> a given *set* of size >= 1 IPs which is paired with a *set* of size >= 1
> of fsids.  The sets are not broken up (that is, we won't be moving 
> file systems between IP addresses or vice-vers), but the number of
> IPs:filesystems need not be 1:1.
> 
>    * 1 file system, 1 ip address
>    * 2 fs, 1 ip
>    * 1 ip, 2 fs
>    * 18 ip, 42 fs.

So you move a bunch of file systems with a bunch of IPs, and that
information is recorded somewhere. So if you know you're moving
set X, which goes with IPs 1.2.3.4 and 1.2.3.5, you might as well
send notifications from both these IPs to all clients having established
locks on a file system from that set.

I think in term of correctness, it's better to send an SM_NOTIFY
for each IP associated with such a set, anyway.

To me, it seems the crucial point of information here when monitoring
a client, is which file system (or set of file systems) the client has
accessed.

Olaf
-- 
Olaf Kirch  |  --- o --- Nous sommes du soleil we love when we play
okir at lst.de |    / | \   sol.dhoop.naytheet.ah kin.ir.samse.qurax