From: Frank van Maarseveen <frankvm@frankvm.com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Linux NFS mailing list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NFS - lock failover
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:30:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111212203027.GA5068@janus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111212195613.GC20826@fieldses.org>
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 02:56:13PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 11:36:46AM +0100, Frank van Maarseveen wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 06:24:16PM +0100, Frank van Maarseveen wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 07:07:22PM +0200, Pavel A wrote:
> > > > Hi everyone!
> > > >
> > > > I was trying not to create new topics, but it seems that posting to an
> > > > old one doesn't bring it up. Here is the original topic I'm referring
> > > > to: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.nfs/13108
> > > >
> > > > I'm building an A/A cluster using NFS v3 and local file systems, and
> > > > looking for
> > > > efficient ways for failover (for now I have to restart nfs-kernel-server on
> > > > Takeover node to be able to initiate grace period), so the discussed solutions
> > > > are very interesting to me.
> > > >
> > > > Now (4 years after) in current nfs-utils packages (v. 1.2.2-4 and later) I can
> > > > see that the ability to release locks was really implemented and is
> > > > working well
> > > > (I mean interfaces /proc/fs/nfsd/unlock_ip and
> > > > /proc/fs/nfsd/unlock_filesystem),
> > > > but how about reacquiring locks on the node, share migrates to? - I've been
> > > > going through various mailing lists and found a lot of discussions on the topic
> > > > (also dated mainly 2007), but don't seem to find any rpc-based mechanism or
> > > > interface like /proc/fs/nfsd/nlm_set_grace to do that, was it ever made?
> > >
> > > I've posted a patch some time ago implementing
> > > /proc/fs/nfsd/relock_filesystem:
> > >
> > > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.nfs/42360
> > > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.nfs/42361
> > > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.nfs/42362
> >
> > Can this patch be scheduled for inclusion in mainline (3.3)?
>
> Could you resend and I'll take another look?
I'll check it again but except for one fuzz it should still apply on
3.2-rc. Patch offsets and an incidental fuzz is sometimes informative
about possible conflict areas. It has been verified on 3.0 and 3.1
>
> But this should really be fixed to handle v4 locks as well.
Why do you think it doesn't?
--
Frank
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-12 20:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-01 17:07 NFS - lock failover Pavel A
2011-12-01 17:24 ` Frank van Maarseveen
2011-12-01 17:34 ` Pavel A
2011-12-01 17:36 ` Pavel A
2011-12-09 10:36 ` Frank van Maarseveen
2011-12-12 19:56 ` J. Bruce Fields
2011-12-12 20:30 ` Frank van Maarseveen [this message]
2011-12-12 20:48 ` J. Bruce Fields
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111212203027.GA5068@janus \
--to=frankvm@frankvm.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox