Kevin, Got out of bed on the wrong side? Such anger. First, the clusterwide device capability is a very small part of OpenSSI so your comment "put the entire clustering layer on top of it" is COMPLETELY wrong - you clearly are commenting about something you know nothing about. In the 2.4 implementation, providing this one capability by leveraging devfs was quite economic, efficient and has been very stable. I'm not sure who you mean by "that's what WE want". If you mean the current worldwide users of OpenSSI on 2.4, they are a very happy group with a kick-ass clustering capability. About one thing you are correct. We are going to have to have a way to lookup and name remote devices in 2.6. I believe the remote file-op mechanism we are using in 2.4 will adapt easily. Bruce Walker Architect and project manager - OpenSSI project > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kevin > P. Fleming > Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 7:41 AM > To: Linux Kernel Mailing List > Cc: linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx; > opengfs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > opengfs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > opendlm-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [Linux-cluster] Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSI 1.0.0 released!! > > > Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > > 5. Devices > > * there is a clusterwide device model via the devfs code > > Yeah, that's we want, take buggy, unreliable, > soon-to-be-removed-from-mainline code and put an entire > clustering layer > on top of it. Too bad someone is going to need to completely > reimplement > this "clusterwide device model". > > -- > > Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster >
