IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
- use ctdb_attach() instead of ctdb_db_handle()
- make ctdb_attach() return an existing db handle if it exists
(This used to be commit be85c48f8d4a22fd4ed922be6f7f1979f349d291)
This doesn't get the ctdb code fully working in Samba4, it just gets
it building and not breaking non-clustered use of Samba. It will take
a bit longer to update some of the calling ctdb_cluster.c code to make
it work correctly in Samba4.
Note also that Samba4 now only links to the client portion of
ctdb. For the moment I am leaving the ctdbd as a separate daemon,
which you install separately from http://ctdb.samba.org/.
(This used to be commit b196077cbb55cbecad87065133c2d67198e31066)
existing ctdb_call() mechanism isn't sufficient. The main problem is
that the operations on the record need to be done with a lock held
while a local posix file operation is happening. We can't use a
ctdb_call callback function to do the actual file opens, renames,
unlinks etc as the callback would run on the wrong node.
So this commit adds the prototypes for two new ctdb API functions
which will make a opendb backend easier. Volker will probably
recognise these functions as they are basically the same as what he
did in his earlier Samba clustering code :-)
(This used to be commit d9a997fd390e4162c015435d1c703fb3a4978f2f)
rather than allocating a reply_data field each time, I have changed
the ctdb_call API to include a status code. That greatly simplifies
use of the API.
(This used to be commit 70c3acaf8876fa5712e2135df234fe3bc1e32e77)
couple of hundred opertations. Also removed a lot of the debug code I
was using to track this down.
(This used to be commit 7622e7b4b2694ec14062d0f6de035b946106a6aa)
- this fix looks really ugly but I don't know a better solution...
if we would use uint8_t *data; then we would send the pointer value
also in the network packet and we would need to initialize
s->data = ((void *)(&s->data) + 1;
to make the memcpy statements work as they're currently,
so we use uint8_t data[1] in the struct definition ...
tridge: please review careful!
hopefully fix the build on solaris and HPUX
metze
(This used to be commit 015097677c8a65e9f5a4367f4f89193a4b2de76b)
at the moment the brlock_ctdb backend will sometimes fail after
dmaster migrations. So to pass tests this needs to be set high. Thats
a priority to fix.
(This used to be commit 45f5c272f366f6a793941d97c9522c5b2b0cb639)
