From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261497AbUBUDUb (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:20:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261496AbUBUDUb (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:20:31 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:7886 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261497AbUBUDSg (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:18:36 -0500 From: Daniel Phillips To: Lars Marowsky-Bree Subject: Re: GFS requirements (was: Non-GPL export of invalidate_mmap_range) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:16:09 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Cc: linux-kernel References: <20040216190927.GA2969@us.ibm.com> <200402201715.34315.phillips@arcor.de> <20040220235602.GD6280@marowsky-bree.de> In-Reply-To: <20040220235602.GD6280@marowsky-bree.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402202216.09908.phillips@arcor.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 20 February 2004 18:56, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > Surely, such a GFS needs a cluster infrastructure - membership, > messaging, DLM - in the kernel. > > Can you or anyone else from Sistina/RHAT clarify on the details of > this? Hi Lars, I presume you meant "DFS". I can't comment on the details of the plan for GFS just now, however consider OpenGFS: yes, it needs and has a cluster infrastructure. The kernel does not dictate anything about that infrastructure. Each DFS is free to implement its own infrastructure, possibly involving kernel extensions. Regards, Regards