Re: Question about the current design on locks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



As posix-locks is loaded on server side, it will be visible to all the the
clients, hence the distributed locking works.

Also, if your question was how unify (or any cluster translator) handles it?
its same as how it handles any other 'fd' based operation. In AFR, lk()
request is sent to all the nodes, and locking is done on all the servers,
where file exists. And in stripe, again, lk() fop is sent to all the servers
where the file exists.

-amar

On 7/12/07, Vikas Gorur <vikas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 09:53:58PM -0300, Daniel van Ham Colchete wrote:
> People,
>
> what's the current design of locks in GlusterFS? I couldn't find the
answer
> looking the sources.
>
> Being more specific: how does cluster/unify and cluter/afr handle
flock()
> and fcntl byte-ranged advisory locking? Is this lock cluster-aware? I'm
> considering only normal circumstances. I'm not worried with split-brain
or
> another type of rare situations.

POSIX record locking support is provided by the posix-locks translator
in GlusterFS (features/posix-locks). It supports both advisory and
mandatory locking. You'd want to load this translator on each server, so
that a lock would be visible to all clients.

Spec file example:

volume locks
  type features/posix-locks
  subvolumes brick1
# option mandatory on
end-volume

Vikas


_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel




--
Amar Tumballi
http://amar.80x25.org
[bulde on #gluster/irc.gnu.org]


[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Users]     [Ceph Users]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux