Slave nodes without proxied I/O?

[David King]

By default, nodes started as slave nodes with slave:start/1 have their  
I/O proxied through the master node that started them. (That is, I/O  
operations done with the 'file' module are done on the master's  
filesystem, not the slaves').

Is there any way to turn this off?
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

[David King]

> By default, nodes started as slave nodes with slave:start/1 have their
> I/O proxied through the master node that started them. (That is, I/O
> operations done with the 'file' module are done on the master's
> filesystem, not the slaves').
> Is there any way to turn this off?

Given the lack of response here, I'll assume that there isn't an easy  
to to turn it off.

Barring that, is there a way to kill the 'file' server on the slave  
(which is just a proxy-process, that passes its messages to the 'file'  
server on the master), and ask it to re-create a new non-proxied server?

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

[Nicolas Niclausse]

David King ecrivait le 01.05.2008 20:34:
>> By default, nodes started as slave nodes with slave:start/1 have their
>> I/O proxied through the master node that started them. (That is, I/O
>> operations done with the 'file' module are done on the master's
>> filesystem, not the slaves').
>> Is there any way to turn this off?
>
> Given the lack of response here, I'll assume that there isn't an easy  
> to to turn it off.

I'm having the same problem as you: i want to start a slave without
proxied I/O.

After some digging, i discover that you only have to remove the "-master
node()" argument in the mk_cmd fun to do that (slave.erl module).


It would be nice to add an extra argument to slave:start/start_link :

something like:

start(Host, Name, Args, ExtraArgs)

where ExtraArgs can be:[noproxy]

I can write a patch if necessary.
--
Nicolas
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

[Nicolas Charpentier-2]

Nicolas Niclausse wrote:
> David King ecrivait le 01.05.2008 20:34:
>>> By default, nodes started as slave nodes with slave:start/1 have their
>>> I/O proxied through the master node that started them. (That is, I/O
>>> operations done with the 'file' module are done on the master's
>>> filesystem, not the slaves').
>>> Is there any way to turn this off?

> I'm having the same problem as you: i want to start a slave without
> proxied I/O.
>
> After some digging, i discover that you only have to remove the "-master
> node()" argument in the mk_cmd fun to do that (slave.erl module).
>

Hi,

Just a question.
I might be wrong but I have always thought that I/O was proxied because
they (master and slave nodes) was sharing the same  group_leader.
If I'm right, we might be able to change the group_leader of processes
on the slave node.


Regards,
Nicolas  Charpentier
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

[Nicolas Niclausse]

Nicolas Charpentier ecrivait le 24.06.2008 20:24:

> Nicolas Niclausse wrote:
>> David King ecrivait le 01.05.2008 20:34:
>>>> By default, nodes started as slave nodes with slave:start/1 have their
>>>> I/O proxied through the master node that started them. (That is, I/O
>>>> operations done with the 'file' module are done on the master's
>>>> filesystem, not the slaves').
>>>> Is there any way to turn this off?
>
>> I'm having the same problem as you: i want to start a slave without
>> proxied I/O.
>>
>> After some digging, i discover that you only have to remove the
>> "-master node()" argument in the mk_cmd fun to do that (slave.erl
>> module).

> I might be wrong but I have always thought that I/O was proxied because
> they (master and slave nodes) was sharing the same  group_leader.
> If I'm right, we might be able to change the group_leader of processes
> on the slave node.

Well, yes, the group_leader of all the process on the slave must be a
process on the first node, i guess; but how can i change this: which pid
should be the new group_leader on the slave node ?

I would be simpler to have an option to slave:start to choose the behavior
of I/O on slave nodes, imho.
--
Nicolas
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions