[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ogfs-dev]Proposal: Clean up the locking module



On Thursday 10 July 2003 04:19 pm, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> > > With OpenDLM in my mind, I would like to chose Linux-HA heartbeat as
> > > cluster manager first. Other cluster manager also should be
> > > supported in
> > > later stage.
> >
> > Does linux-HA heartbeat still have the limitation of only 2-node
> > failover?  Or is that a factor in what you have in mind?
>
> Yes, heartbeat only supports 2-node failover, but I don't think ogfs
> would utilize any failover logic.
>
> ogfs might use the heartbeat api, but I don't see any join/leave event
> notification in it.  I'm either missing it, or heartbeat has another
> api.  Brian, do you know?
>
>   http://linux-ha.org/heartbeat/heartbeat_api.html

The OCF event API draft 2 is what has been implemented in heartbeat
OCF event API draft 2:
http://opencf.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/specs/event/Event.api?rev=1.2&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
the OCF includes that are a part of heartbeat are here:
http://cvs.linux-ha.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/linux-ha/include/ocf/

One thing to look at would be how EVMS does it. All the code they have that 
deals with clustering is in the plugins/ha directory of their code.

>
> FYI: I don't recall the max nodes supported by the heartbeat api, but
> I'm pretty sure it is more than 2.

linux-ha/include/heartbeat.h:
#define MAXNODE         100

>
> > I'm wondering if it would be easy to simply use memexpd as the cluster
> > manager for now, rather than trying to switch.  We could probably
> > continue to use memexpd as cluster manager, *without* using it as lock
> > manager, once we get OpenDLM support.
>
> Agreed, or alternatively, we could work on restructuring the clustering
> logic first, then do the locking restructure later.  It does seem easier
> to work on one or the other.

too right!

>
> > If this makes sense, Stan, could you write up a more detailed design
> > proposal?  Describe how you would split up the memexp module's private
> > data structure into separate cluster/lock modules?  Which functions in
> > which module?  etc.
> >
> > Any comments from anyone else?
> >
> > -- Ben --
> >
> > Opinions are mine, not Intel's
> >
> > > Any comments?
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Stan
<snip>
p.s. I just snipped like 40 lines of sf adds, sigs, etc. and so can you and 
you and you :)

-- 
OpenGFS -- http://opengfs.sourceforge.net
Home -- http://www.brianandsara.net



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Parasoft
Error proof Web apps, automate testing & more.
Download & eval WebKing and get a free book.
www.parasoft.com/bulletproofapps1
_______________________________________________
Opengfs-devel mailing list
Opengfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opengfs-devel

[Kernel]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Clusters]     [Linux RAID]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Resources]

Powered by Linux