Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 09:45:47 +0100 From: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Cc: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>, FreeBSD virtualization <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org> Subject: NFS alternatives (was: Re: Storage overhead on zvols) Message-ID: <4A321A55-23FA-42AB-BF65-3DCA3464307D@punkt.de> In-Reply-To: <201712051641.vB5GfR5I052310@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <201712051641.vB5GfR5I052310@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi all, > Am 05.12.2017 um 17:41 schrieb Rodney W. Grimes = <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>: > In effect what your asking for is what NFS does, so use NFS and get > over the fact that this is the way to get what you want. Sure you > could implement a virt-vfs but I wonder how close the spec of that > would be to the spec of NFS. I figure it should be possible to implement something simpler than NFS that provides full local posix semantics under the constraint that only one "client" is allowed to mount the FS at a time. I see quite a few applications for something like this, specifically in "hyperconvergent" environments. Or vagrant, of course. *scratching head* isn't this what Sun's "network disk" protocol = provided? Kind regards, Patrick --=20 punkt.de GmbH Internet - Dienstleistungen - Beratung Kaiserallee 13a Tel.: 0721 9109-0 Fax: -100 76133 Karlsruhe info@punkt.de http://punkt.de AG Mannheim 108285 Gf: Juergen Egeling
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A321A55-23FA-42AB-BF65-3DCA3464307D>