From: Boris Z. (boris@conley.com)
Date: 02/24/99-03:22:34 PM Z
Message-ID: <01BE6011.E3543610.boris@conley.com> From: "Boris Z." <boris@conley.com> Subject: RE: Caching and callbacks Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 16:22:34 -0500 Guy, Sorry, if I misled you or anybody else. I never mentioned SMB oplocks, as well as it was not mentioned in the original question. I described a model that I wanted to add to NFS4 two years ago, adding right now lease TMO to raise reliability and make call-backs optional. The model may look a bit more complicated than CIFS's, but in fact it's very close to our locking mechanism and probably can be implemented as a single server module. On Wednesday, February 24, 1999 3:20 PM, Guy Harris [SMTP:guy@netapp.com] wrote: > > Server will delay any write operation on the oplock protected range > > Oplock protected *RANGE*? > > Which SMB spec has that? The ones I've seen have oplocks as file locks, > not byte-range locks.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-01:46:44 AM Z CST