The server is definitely not using the msgpairarray code right now. I
think it would be handy to keep it in the common area, though, because
it could be used for server to server communication in the future.
It actually started out just being a client side thing, but I moved it
to common whil
Seems reasonable. BTW, we've talked about this already, but since the
msgpairarray state machine is the current topic, I'll reiterate some of
my ideas. Its written in such a way that at present can't be used by
sys-io.sm. The problem is that it blocks (doesn't complete) waiting
for a r
I used it in the server for my thesis also.
Phil Carns wrote:
The server is definitely not using the msgpairarray code right now. I
think it would be handy to keep it in the common area, though, because
it could be used for server to server communication in the future.
It actually started ou
OK, thanks (and thanks Brad). that's kind of what I thought. For the
moment it really isn't an issue of being "in" the server, as being used
by client state machines versus server state machines. I presume when
you used it in the server, the server was acting as a client and running
a client
Hi Walt,
I'm not sure that we really want to literally run client state machines
on the server. Most of them probably are probably not going to map
correctly to that environment (they store results in different places,
have different assumptions about who to contact, look for config values
i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:59 +0200:
> I'm not sure that we really want to literally run client state machines
> on the server. Most of them probably are probably not going to map
> correctly to that environment (they store results in different places,
> have different assum
Well fuck me but my modified version passed the ping/ls/cp/ls/cp/diff
test! Now I've got to find something more rigorous.
Walt
___
Pvfs2-developers mailing list
Pvfs2-developers@beowulf-underground.org
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/lis
Pete Wyckoff wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:59 +0200:
I'm not sure that we really want to literally run client state machines
on the server. Most of them probably are probably not going to map
correctly to that environment (they store results in different places,
have
hey guys
Brad has made some changes to the web site, making the old PVFS2 site
the main site. There is still a link from there to PVFS 1.X (as there
always was.
Probably the biggest changes are needed in the documentation (FAQ,
quickstart etc.) and those should probably be done in the tree
Btw, if we're talking about usability issues as well, I would suggest
getting rid of the home button, and instead making the big image up top
be a link to the homepage. I always expect header images like that to
take me to the 1st page.
Cheers,
Brad
Walt Ligon wrote:
hey guys
Brad has mad
Remember this? Never mind. Oh, the head of the main branch works great!
Walt
Walt Ligon wrote:
Well fuck me but my modified version passed the ping/ls/cp/ls/cp/diff
test! Now I've got to find something more rigorous.
Walt
___
Pvfs2-developers
11 matches
Mail list logo
