On 01/11/2012 09:44 AM, Benny Halevy wrote: >> >> Understood that it may depend on where things stand in April, but: what >> specifically do you think will be likely to require the attention of a >> wider group of linux filesystem developers (ass opposed to just nfs >> developers)? > > I have nothing specific at this time. My thinking was to present the > what's and why's > of the prerequisites in high level and maybe provide an example. > At the time there where some reservations from people about some of the added hooks and vectors. If there are still, we would like to hear them and either address them or argue their validity. I think this talk should be expanded with Jeff's suggestions. here: > - RichACLs > - Share/Deny mode support on open > - mandatory locking that doesn't rely on weirdo file modes > > It's always going to be hard for us to compete with dedicated > appliances. Where Linux can shine though is in allowing for more > innovative combinations. > > Being able to do active/active NFS serving from clustered filesystems, > for instance is something that we can eventually attain but that would > be harder to do in an appliance. This sort of discussion might also > dovetail with Benny's proposal about pNFS serving. So the broader topic can be: "The things we want/need from the Kernel to make it exportable" Thanks Boaz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
