avati at gluster.com
Mon Sep 14 19:17:48 UTC 2009
On 9/14/09, Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw at ithnet.com> wrote:
> > 2. running bash wasnt a very useful scenario when the LD_PRELOAD
> > variable can be added for the bash environment as a whole. For eg.
> > if you just do "export LD_PRELOAD=<blah>" on the command line, you can
> > actually have every program started from that shell use booster.
> > -Shehjar
> There is a problem with that: if your bash environment calls only one other
> bash-script it will fail either. Another problem can be script-replaced
> binaries. If you replace some classical binary with a shell-script for
> additional parameters (or any other thinkable reason) this general export
> approach will fail, too.
> Or lets say your favourite email client calls some script to mark spam...
> There are a lot of black holes in this ground ...
The aim of booster is to boost specific application performance (like
apache, unfsd etc) and not (yet) be a general purpose solution (like
loading under bash).
Booster at this point does not aim to be a complete replacement for a
FUSE mountpoint for all usage scenarios. It does _not_ work as a
general purpose client. It cannot provide complete POSIX compliance
since it is not possible to provide proper compliance without being in
the kernel (or being in the userspace "behind" the kernel - like fuse
based clients). For working properly under a shell, booster would need
to provide proper POSIX semantics (like certain stuff to be handled
between forked processes etc), which at this point requires a lot of
work, and which is in a lower priority at the moment.
More information about the Gluster-users