mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@oracle.com>
Cc: teigland@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] dlm: overview
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:19:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050425141953.51a71862.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050425203952.GE25002@ca-server1.us.oracle.com>

Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> > This is a distributed lock manager (dlm) that we'd like to see added to
> > the kernel.  The dlm programming api is very similar to that found on
> > other operating systems, but this is modeled most closely after that in
> > VMS.
> 
> do you have any performance data at all on this ? I like to see a dlm
> but I like to see something that will also perform well. My main concern
> is that I have not seen anything relying on this code do "reasonably
> well". eg can you show gfs numbers w/ number of nodes and scalability ?
> 
> I think it's time we submit ocfs2 w/ it's cluster stack so that folks
> can compare (including actual data/numbers), we have been waiting to
> stabilize everything but I guess there is this preemptive strike going
> on so we might just as well. at least we have had hch and folks comment,
> before sending to submit code.

Preemptive strikes won't work, coz this little target will just redirect
the incoming munitions at his other aggressors ;)

It is good that RH has got this process underway.  David, I assume that
other interested parties (ocfs, lustre, etc) know that this is happening? 
If not, could you please let them know and invite them to comment?

> Andrew - we will submit ocfs2 so you can have a look, compare and move
> on.  we will work with any stack that eventuslly gets accepted, just want 
> to see the choice out there and an educated decision.

In an ideal world, the various clustering groups would haggle this thing
into shape, come to a consensus patch series which they all can use and I
would never need to look at the code from a decision-making POV.

The world isn't ideal, but merging something over the strenuous objections
of one or more major groups would be quite regrettable - let's hope that
doesn't happen.  Although it might.

> hopefully tomorrow, including data comparing single node and multinode
> performance.

OK.  I'm unlikely to merge any first-round patches, as I expect there will
be plenty of review comments and I'm already in a bit of a mess here wrt
patch backlog, email backlog, bug backlog and apparently there have been
some changes in the SCM area...

  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-04-25 21:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-04-25 15:11 David Teigland
2005-04-25 20:39 ` Wim Coekaerts
2005-04-25 21:09   ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-26  5:30     ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-27 13:56       ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-27 20:00         ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-27 20:20           ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-27 22:38             ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-28 14:57               ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-28 20:53                 ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-29  0:33                 ` David Lang
2005-04-29  1:49                   ` Bernd Eckenfels
2005-04-29  1:52                   ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-29 17:13                     ` David Lang
2005-04-29 20:49                       ` Daniel Phillips
2005-05-01  3:57                       ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-05-01  4:14                         ` David Lang
2005-05-02 11:21                           ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-28 16:25         ` David Teigland
2005-04-28 16:42           ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-29  4:24           ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-25 21:19   ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2005-04-26  5:46     ` David Teigland
2005-04-26  5:39   ` David Teigland
2005-04-26 18:48     ` Mark Fasheh
2005-04-26 22:34       ` Steven Dake
2005-04-27  3:32       ` David Teigland
2005-04-27 13:23       ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-27 18:12         ` Mark Fasheh
2005-04-28 14:36           ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-28 17:35             ` Mark Fasheh
2005-04-28 12:50         ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-04-25 20:52 ` Daniel Phillips

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20050425141953.51a71862.akpm@osdl.org \
    --to=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=teigland@redhat.com \
    --cc=wim.coekaerts@oracle.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®