On Thursday 21 July 2005 02:55, Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs) wrote:
> Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
> "nodemanager" kernel component. Our discussions in the cluster meeting
> Monday and Tuesday were assuming it was a general service that other
> kernel
On 2005-07-20T11:39:38, Joel Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In turn, let me clarify a little where configfs fits in to
> things. Configfs is merely a convenient and transparent method to
> communicate configuration to kernel objects. It's not a place for
> uevents, for netlink
On 2005-07-20T11:39:38, Joel Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In turn, let me clarify a little where configfs fits in to
things. Configfs is merely a convenient and transparent method to
communicate configuration to kernel objects. It's not a place for
uevents, for netlink sockets, or
On Thursday 21 July 2005 02:55, Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs) wrote:
Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
nodemanager kernel component. Our discussions in the cluster meeting
Monday and Tuesday were assuming it was a general service that other
kernel components
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:09:18PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2005-07-20T09:55:31, "Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
> > "nodemanager" kernel component. Our discussions in the cluster
> >
On 2005-07-20T09:55:31, "Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
> "nodemanager" kernel component. Our discussions in the cluster
> meeting Monday and Tuesday were assuming it was a general service that
> other
r.kernel.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Linux-cluster] Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] nodemanager, ocfs2, dlm
On 2005-07-20T11:35:46, David Teigland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Also, eventually we obviously need to have state for the nodes -
> > up/down et cetera. I think the node
On 2005-07-20T11:35:46, David Teigland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Also, eventually we obviously need to have state for the nodes - up/down
> > et cetera. I think the node manager also ought to track this.
> We don't have a need for that information yet; I'm hoping we won't ever
> need it in
On 2005-07-20T11:35:46, David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, eventually we obviously need to have state for the nodes - up/down
et cetera. I think the node manager also ought to track this.
We don't have a need for that information yet; I'm hoping we won't ever
need it in the
PROTECTED]
Subject: [Linux-cluster] Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] nodemanager, ocfs2, dlm
On 2005-07-20T11:35:46, David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, eventually we obviously need to have state for the nodes -
up/down et cetera. I think the node manager also ought to track this.
We don't have
On 2005-07-20T09:55:31, Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
nodemanager kernel component. Our discussions in the cluster
meeting Monday and Tuesday were assuming it was a general service that
other kernel
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:09:18PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2005-07-20T09:55:31, Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
nodemanager kernel component. Our discussions in the cluster
meeting Monday
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 05:52:14PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> The nodeid, I thought, was relative to a given DLM namespace, no? This
> concept seems to be missing here, or are you suggesting the nodeid to be
> global across namespaces?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. A node
On 2005-07-18T14:15:53, David Teigland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some of the comments about the dlm concerned how it's configured (from
> user space.) In particular, there was interest in seeing the dlm and
> ocfs2 use common methods for their configuration.
>
> The first area I'm looking at
On 2005-07-18T14:15:53, David Teigland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some of the comments about the dlm concerned how it's configured (from
user space.) In particular, there was interest in seeing the dlm and
ocfs2 use common methods for their configuration.
The first area I'm looking at is how
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 05:52:14PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
The nodeid, I thought, was relative to a given DLM namespace, no? This
concept seems to be missing here, or are you suggesting the nodeid to be
global across namespaces?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. A node would
16 matches
Mail list logo
