login
Header Space

 
 

Re: POHMELFS high performance network filesystem. Transactions, failover, performance.

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@...>
Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@...>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <netdev@...>, <linux-fsdevel@...>
Date: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - 12:09 pm

On Wed, 14 May 2008, Jamie Lokier wrote:

Right.  In my case, I require guaranteed consistent results for critical 
cluster state, and use (slightly modified) Paxos for that.  For file data, 
I leverage that cluster state to still maintain perfect consistency in 
most failure scenarios, while also degrading gracefully to a read/write 
access to a single replica.

When problem situations arise (e.g., replicating to A+B, A fails, 
read/write to just B for a while, B fails, A recovers), an administrator 
can step in and explicitly indicate we want to relax consistency to 
continue (e.g., if B is found to be unsalvageable and a stale A is the 
best we can do).


Anything that silently relaxes consistency like that scares me.  Does 
anybody really do that in practice?

sage
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: POHMELFS high performance network filesystem. Transactio..., Sage Weil, (Wed May 14, 12:09 pm)
Re: POHMELFS high performance network filesystem. Transactio..., Evgeniy Polyakov, (Wed May 14, 11:00 am)
speck-geostationary