I'm the one who opposed sfex in the previous discussion. My point was simple that: """" check-and-reserve on disk is not an atomic CAS operation. and lock based on that may silently cause data corruption. """
I haven't follow the evolution of sfex though, so things might have been changed. Just FYI. 2008/6/17 Dejan Muhamedagic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hello, > > Since last year NTT designed and implemented sfex, a suite of > programs to improve shared disk usage (see linux-ha.org/sfex) > which unfortunately didn't attract attention it deserves. I > reviewed the code and attached you'll find some comments and some > simple changes. One general remark: all programs (sfex_*) are > monolithic and, though they are not that big, it would be > beneficial to code readers if they were split into more > units/functions. > > A couple of suggestions on making sfex useful in other contexts > were making a quorum plugin and a HBcomm plugin. Did you > investigate further these options? > > Of course, if you agree, we could include sfex into the heartbeat > repository. > > Cheers, > > Dejan > _______________________________________________________ > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/ > _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
