On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 05:16:24AM -0400, Krishna Srinivas wrote: > It was pretty confusing to read this thread. Hope I can clarify the > questions here. Thanks. I was confused. > The other discussion in this thread was related to NLM which has been > implemented in 3.3.0. This is to support locking calls from the NFS > clients to support fcntl() locking for the applications running on nfs > client. NLM server is implemented in glusterfs as well as kernel. NLM > server implemented in kernel is used by kernel-nfsd as well as > kernel-nfs-client. Hence if you have an nfs mount point, the > kernel-nfs-client automatically starts kernel NLM server. So if > glusterfs-nfs process is already running on a system (and hence it > also runs its own NLM server) and if you try to do "mount -t nfs > someserver:/export /mnt/nfs" on the same system it fails as > kernel-nfs-client won't be able to start kernel-NLM-server (because > glusterfs NLM server would have already registered with portmapper for > NLM service and hence kernel-NLM-server registration with portmapper > fails). Workaround is "mount -t nfs -o nolock someserver:/export > /mnt/nfs" if you really want to have an nfs mount on the same machine > where glusterfs-nfs process is running. So, if you want to run both at once, only one can lock. Is the architecture of NLM such that there could never be a single NLM server for both Gluster and kernel (whether that single server be Gluster's or kernel's)? Thanks, Whit
