Re: Lazy umount emulation

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

 



Emmanuel,

Yeah, that should do. I don't think you need
to go out of the way to support lazy umount functionality
in *BSD, when it's not essential to the working of replace-brick
and other commands that use lazy umount.

~KP



----- Original Message -----
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 02:03:28AM -0400, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
> > IIRC, lazy umount is being used in glusterd to avoid leaving
> > behind an entry in /etc/mtab, for every internal mount that
> > failed to unmount for some reason. replace-brick command doesn't
> > have a requirement that the umount must happen in a lazy manner.
> 
> And since *BSD do not have a /etc/mtab, there is really no requirement.
> I will resubmit a change without lazy umount emulation.
> 
> 
> --
> Emmanuel Dreyfus
> manu@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel




[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