[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Discouraging :local:

From: Kenneth Porter
Subject: Re: Discouraging :local:
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 02:48:59 -0800

--On Saturday, January 25, 2003 2:42 PM -0500 "Greg A. Woods" <address@hidden> wrote:

The latter, the sharing part, is where the real trouble begins.
Ensuring reliable order of operations for various operations which would
be "atomic" on a local filesystem is very very difficult (literally
impossible in some cases) for shared network filesystems.

Do we include Samba in this? (I use Samba to host some PVCS archives and haven't seen any archive corruption. All access is "local" because I'm using the peer-to-peer PVCS stuff, not server stuff.)

Also of course there are potential data integrity issues with networked
filesystems.  The integrity checks in UDP are really quite lame.  The
integrity checks in TCP are not even all that great.  Meanwhile SCSI
parity checks are more reliable and the nature of how hardware errors
can occur in something like a SCSI interface make those parity checks
more likely to detect all errors.

Is Ethernet then unreliable? Isn't the data integrity handled at the physical layer, with CRC's?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]