Anand Avati a écrit :
Kevan,
I just submitted a patch to fuse-devel which adds flock() support to fuse.
You could either wait for the next fuse release, or install glusterfs's
patched fuse (2.7.0-glfs3) which has that patch included.
thanks,
avati
I run a small application that uses flock on a clustereds FS (glusterfs
1.3.7 with fuse 2.7.0-glfs5), it clearly shows that flock locking is not
working in that situation. Are you sure flock trouble has been solved ?
2007/8/7, Kevan Benson <kbenson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Any consensus on whether flock support is planned for the future? I seem
to
remember reading somewhere in the documentation that a native glusterfs
client was being considered at some point in the future, which could make
this feasible.
On Monday 06 August 2007 09:27, Amar S. Tumballi wrote:
Thanks for pointing out the mistakes in wiki.. just corrected it.
-amar
On 8/6/07, Kevan Benson <kbenson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sunday 05 August 2007 23:28, Vikas Gorur wrote:
What you're trying to do is use flock(2) locks. flock(2) locks are
not
supported by FUSE. The lock requests will be handled by the kernel
itself and never reach FUSE, let alone GlusterFS.
The posix-locks translator implements the fcntl(2) locking API.
fcntl(2) allows for more fine-grained locking, as it supports
locking
of particular regions inside a file --- whereas flock(2) locks are
on
the entire file.
flock(2) and fcntl(2) locks can co-exist on Linux. There is
absolutely
no interaction between them.
In summary, if you want distributed file locks, you should use the
fcntl(2) API, not flock(2).
Thanks. Does that mean the the part of the FAQ that mentions flock
along
with
fcntl is incorrect, or just mentioning a feature not supported _yet_?
--
Vincent Régnard
vregnard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
TBS-internet.com
027 630 5902
