On Jul 22 2007 00:43, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 11:17:43PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Jul 21 2007 22:38, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>> >
>> >We implement shared-disk semantics in a shared-nothing cluster.
>>
>> If nothing is shared, the disk is not shared, but got shared-disk
>> semantics? A little confusing.
>
>Think of it as RAID1 over TCP.
And what does it do better than raid1-over-NBD? (Which is already N-disk,
and, logically, seems to support cluster filesystems)
>Typically you have one Node in Primary, the other as Secondary,
>replication target only.
>But you can also have both Active, for use with a cluster file system.
>
>So the semantics are like you have
>two (to come: N) nodes and a shared disk.
>only that there is not one shared disk,
>but two (N) replicated ones.
>
>btw, regarding linux kernel CodingStyle issues.
>scripts/checkpatch.pl reports 2000+ lines of complaints.
>I'm working on it now, it is mostly whitespace (lame excuse: phil grew
>up with emacs and gnu coding style, sorry for that).
>
Jan
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
