[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:41 -0500:
> Without some form of server-to-server communication, verification of this
> config file is probably not doable. I was not envisioning adding the
> verification protocols at the server. I have vastly simplified the
> problem by relying on admins to ensure that the files are kept uptodate,
> which admittedly is quite unrealistic.
>
> Instead, the clients verify whether all servers have the same config files
> which we recently added to the fs-add state machine and optionally
> verify at the time of PVFS_isys_fs_add.
Alright, totally makes sense. The client verification is just a
sanity check that the admin has not messed anything up, then. Valid.
> Admins are expected to edit the fs.conf files, copy it to all servers (or
> if it was on an NFS volume edit just once), and have a new mgmt tool which
> causes all servers to re-read the config files and have clients do the
> verification..
Okay, that's fine, and a vast improvement on our current scenario.
I thought with your discussion of getconfig/putconfig that you were
implicitly planning to get server-to-server communication to work
too.
What you describe here sounds like fine stuff. And if later
somebody gets ambitious and wants to do more "zeroconf"-ish work,
they can build on this. Thanks for the explanations.
-- Pete
_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-developers mailing list
Pvfs2-developers@beowulf-underground.org
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
