Brian Taber wrote: > I just ran lock tests I found in the QA section on 2 servers at the same > time with 500 threads each, they all ran successfully. I am currently > running the TLA version of gluster, I don't know if that makes a > difference... So do I. Could you try the test in network mode? The source available from the link on the GlusterFS QA page doesn't support network-based tests (however, it does by documentation). There's an updated version at http://nfsv4.bullopensource.org/tools/tests/page45.php that can really do the trick. After compiling, you run locktests -f <file> \ -n <number of processes per node> \ -c <number of nodes - 1> on one server and locktests --server <servernode> on the other(s). This will test locking the same file from two clients. I would be interested in your results and your configuration, if you can make them public. Thanks, -- cc >> Brian Taber wrote: >>> I have been running Dovecot and Postfix with a 2 brick setup and posix >>> locking enabled on each brick for a while with no problems. This is a >>> Maildir setup... Dovecot is setup to use fcntl for locking.... remember >>> that gluster does not support flock as fuse does not support it... >> Yes, I'm aware of this. But in your place, I would stop doing this until >> the GlusterFS QA test runs successfully. If it doesn't, then not losing >> data with such a setup is just a matter of luck. And for this storage >> application, I can't accept the risk. >> >>>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Székelyi Szabolcs wrote: >>>> >>>>> Everything works fine as long as I don't introduce locking, which is >>>>> essential if one wishes to use the storage eg. as a backend for a mail >>>>> server. >>>> I'm sorry that I cannot answer your question, but do you have a choice >>>> in >>>> what mail server to use? Those that use the Maildir format (Like for >>>> example Postfix together with Courier-IMAP) does not need locking.
