On Mon, 2013-09-30 at 16:08 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 09/30/2013 04:00 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote: > > pNFS, FhGFS, Lustre, Ceph, etc., all of them shall implement their own > > interface? And userspace needs to address all of them differently? > > The NFS and SCSI groups have each defined a standard which Zach's proposal > abstracts into a common user API. > > Distributed file systems tend to be rather unique and do not have similar > standard bodies, but a lot of them could hide server specific implementations > under the current proposed interfaces. > > What is not a good idea is to drag out the core, simple copy offload > discussion > for another 5 years to pull in every odd use case :)
Agreed. The whole idea of a common system call interface should be to allow us to abstract away the underlying storage and filesystem architectures. If filesystem developers also want a way to expose that underlying architecture to applications in order to enable further optimisations, then that belongs in a separate discussion. -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp trond.mykleb...@netapp.com www.netapp.com
