Lars Ellenberg wrote: > meanwhile, please, anyone interessted, > the drbd paper for LinuxConf Eu 2007 is finalized. > http://www.drbd.org/fileadmin/drbd/publications/ > drbd8.linux-conf.eu.2007.pdf > > it does not give too much implementation detail (would be inapropriate > for conference proceedings, imo; some paper commenting on the source > code should follow). > > but it does give a good overview about what DRBD actually is, > what exact problems it tries to solve, > and what developments to expect in the near future. > > so you can make up your mind about > "Do we need it?", and > "Why DRBD? Why not NBD + MD-RAID?" Ok, conceptually your driver sounds really interresting, but when I read the pdf I got completely turned off. The problem is that the concepts are not clearly implemented, when in fact the concepts are really simple: Allow shared access to remote block storage with fault tolerance. The first thing to tackle here would be write serialization. Then start thinking about fault tolerance. Now, shared remote block access should theoretically be handled, as does DRBD, by a block layer driver, but realistically it may be more appropriate to let it be handled by the combining end user, like OCFS or GFS. The idea here is to simplify lower layer implementations while removing any preconceived dependencies, and let upper layers reign free without incurring redundant overhead. Look at ZFS; it illegally violates layering by combining md/dm/lvm with the fs, but it does this based on a realistic understanding of the problems involved, which enables it to improve performance, flexibility, and functionality specific to its use case. This implies that there are two distinct forces at work here: 1. Layer components 2. Use-Case composers Layer components should technically not implement any use case (other than providing a plumbing framework), as that would incur unnecessary dependencies, which could reduce its generality and thus reusability. Use-Case composers can now leverage layer components from across the layering hierarchy, to yield a specific use case implementation. DRBD is such a Use-Case composer, as is mdm / dm / lvm and any fs in general, whereas aoe / nbd / loop and the VFS / FUSE are examples of layer components. It follows that Use-case composers, like DRBD, need common functionality that should be factored out into layer components, and then recompose to implement a specific use case. Thanks! -- Al - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
