[OpenAFS-devel] byte-range locking

[Neulinger, Nathan]

Very cool! Well, shoot, now that you have that implemented on windows,
unix side will have to catch up. *laugh*

-- Nathan

------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Neulinger                       EMail:  nneul@umr.edu
University of Missouri - Rolla         Phone: (573) 341-6679
UMR Information Technology             Fax: (573) 341-4216
=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeffrey Altman [mailto:jaltman@secure-endpoints.com]=20
> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 8:25 AM
> To: Neulinger, Nathan
> Cc: jbuehler@hekimian.com; openafs-devel@openafs.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenAFS-devel] byte-range locking
>=20
> Byte-range locking has now been implemented for Windows.   The code
> has been committed to the cvs head.   I hope to backport the changes
> to a post 1.4.0 release after it is proven to be stable.
>=20
> Jeffrey Altman
>=20
>=20
> Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
>=20
> > Yes, it's been discussed several times, and yes, it should almost
> > certainly work, please read the list archives and twiki.
> >=20
> > No, patches don't exist. Most useful platform is windows,=20
> and I don't
> > have much interest in developing for it.=20
> >=20
> > Patches would certainly be welcomed on the windows side=20
> since it is so
> > negatively impacted by the lack of byte range locks.=20
> >=20
> > -- Nathan
> >=20
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Nathan Neulinger                       EMail:  nneul@umr.edu
> > University of Missouri - Rolla         Phone: (573) 341-6679
> > UMR Information Technology             Fax: (573) 341-4216
> > =20
> >=20
> >=20
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: openafs-devel-admin@openafs.org=20
> >>[mailto:openafs-devel-admin@openafs.org] On Behalf Of Joe Buehler
> >>Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 9:02 AM
> >>To: openafs-devel@openafs.org
> >>Subject: [OpenAFS-devel] byte-range locking
> >>
> >>If I understand the existing code correctly, a server process
> >>(I don't know which one -- fileserver?) keeps track of=20
> >>clients that have
> >>exclusive or non-exclusive locks on a file.  Clients are
> >>responsible for keeping track of which processes have such locks.
> >>
> >>So it looks as though it should be easy to add local byte-range
> >>locking for processes on a single machine.  Read locks would be
> >>propagated to the server as shared locks, and write locks would
> >>propagate as exclusive locks, and the byte ranges would be
> >>handled in the local client kernel code.
> >>
> >>Does someone already have patches for this perhaps?
> >>--=20
> >>Joe Buehler
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>OpenAFS-devel mailing list
> >>OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org
> >>https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
> >>
> >>
> >=20
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenAFS-devel mailing list
> > OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org
> > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
>=20