-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jake Thebault-Spieker wrote: > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Lars Schimmer > <l.schim...@cgv.tugraz.at>wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi! >> >> I've seen the code for server priorities made in a GSoC is in the >> private windows test builds. >> >> As it could solve one smaller design problem for us, one question is open: >> On which base does it rate server "near" and "far"? >> AFAIK based on RTT time. >> > > Current private builds use RTT as taken from the rx statiscs that are > gathered on a per-client basis, and use a log (base-e) scale to provide a > rank based on the RTT. > > >> Our setup is expanded with a fileserver with only RO on a different >> subnet some miles away, attached to us via a static VPN. >> In one of our private subnets we drive our CAVE and this subnet is not >> routed accross the VPN - if we put the CAVE ROs on the fileserver on the >> far away fileserver, the clients does not reach them. >> For now, the ROs are not there (kinda bad in kind of backup reasons). >> Could this new feature solve this (in a bad way, I know) with just rate >> the "bad" fileserver horrible bad? >> > > If I understand what your end goals are, you're trying to minimize the > amount of traffic to the file server on the other side of the VPN. If this > is the case, then there is functionality available currently, using "fs > serverprefs". The administrator can set the server rank much higher than the > ranks the other servers are being given, and this server will only be > interacted with if all the other servers with lower ranks are down. > > The RTT based ranking only gets taken into account when there are rx > statistics collected by the client, so if the client has never interacted > with the file server on the other side of the VPN, there will be no rx > statistics gathered, and the rank will default to the current scheme (based > on which machine, subnet, network the server is on compared to the client). > > I hope this helps, please clarify if I misunderstood your goals. If you do > try it, I would appreciate feedback you have.
Thank you, that helped. Our point is: we got some clients in a 10.x subnet which is not routed across VPN ad therefore those clients cannot reach that fileserver. An as you tell, based on transmitted rx - with no traffic, no stats, no change for us. MfG, Lars Schimmer - -- - ------------------------------------------------------------- TU Graz, Institut für ComputerGraphik & WissensVisualisierung Tel: +43 316 873-5405 E-Mail: l.schim...@cgv.tugraz.at Fax: +43 316 873-5402 PGP-Key-ID: 0x4A9B1723 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkrYEfYACgkQmWhuE0qbFyMEgQCfRDJhizcbIMEmA+3kKuL6bT5P SdMAnjGbauLFSsvGR+kCRERbb5ILpVhO =WCsi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list OpenAFS-info@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
