[Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.0.2 small file read performance benchmark

[Tejas N. Bhise]

Ed,

oplocks are implemented by SAMBA and it would not be a part of GlusterFS per se till we implement a native SAMBA translator ( something that would replace the SAMBA server itself with a thin SAMBA kind of a layer on top of GlusterFS itself ). We are doing that for NFS by building an NFS translator.

At some point, it would be interesting to explore, clustered SAMBA using ctdb, where two GlusterFS clients can export the same volume. ctdb itself seems to be coming up well now.

Regards,
Tejas.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed W" <lists at wildgooses.com>
To: "Gluster Users" <gluster-users at gluster.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2010 12:10:47 AM GMT +05:30 Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, New Delhi
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] GlusterFS 3.0.2 small file	read	performance	benchmark

On 01/03/2010 20:44, Ed W wrote:
>
> I believe samba (and probably others) use a two way lock escalation 
> facility to mitigate a similar problem.  So you can "read-lock" or 
> phrased differently, "express your interest in caching some 
> files/metadata" and then if someone changes what you are watching the 
> lock break is pushed to you to invalidate your cache.

Seems NFS v4 implements something similar via "delegations" (not 
believed implemented in linux NFSv4 though...)

In samba the equivalent are called "op locks"

I guess this would be a great project for someone interested to work on 
- op-lock translator for gluster

Ed W
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users at gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users