How much of this implementation is in a place where it could be used by a Unix client?
-derek "Neulinger, Nathan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Very cool! Well, shoot, now that you have that implemented on windows, > unix side will have to catch up. *laugh* > > -- Nathan > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Nathan Neulinger EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > University of Missouri - Rolla Phone: (573) 341-6679 > UMR Information Technology Fax: (573) 341-4216 > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeffrey Altman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 8:25 AM >> To: Neulinger, Nathan >> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OpenAFS-devel] byte-range locking >> >> Byte-range locking has now been implemented for Windows. The code >> has been committed to the cvs head. I hope to backport the changes >> to a post 1.4.0 release after it is proven to be stable. >> >> Jeffrey Altman >> >> >> Neulinger, Nathan wrote: >> >> > Yes, it's been discussed several times, and yes, it should almost >> > certainly work, please read the list archives and twiki. >> > >> > No, patches don't exist. Most useful platform is windows, >> and I don't >> > have much interest in developing for it. >> > >> > Patches would certainly be welcomed on the windows side >> since it is so >> > negatively impacted by the lack of byte range locks. >> > >> > -- Nathan >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > Nathan Neulinger EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > University of Missouri - Rolla Phone: (573) 341-6679 >> > UMR Information Technology Fax: (573) 341-4216 >> > >> > >> > >> >>-----Original Message----- >> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe Buehler >> >>Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 9:02 AM >> >>To: [email protected] >> >>Subject: [OpenAFS-devel] byte-range locking >> >> >> >>If I understand the existing code correctly, a server process >> >>(I don't know which one -- fileserver?) keeps track of >> >>clients that have >> >>exclusive or non-exclusive locks on a file. Clients are >> >>responsible for keeping track of which processes have such locks. >> >> >> >>So it looks as though it should be easy to add local byte-range >> >>locking for processes on a single machine. Read locks would be >> >>propagated to the server as shared locks, and write locks would >> >>propagate as exclusive locks, and the byte ranges would be >> >>handled in the local client kernel code. >> >> >> >>Does someone already have patches for this perhaps? >> >>-- >> >>Joe Buehler >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >>OpenAFS-devel mailing list >> >>[email protected] >> >>https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel >> >> >> >> >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > OpenAFS-devel mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel >> > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel > > -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
