On 13 Apr 2016, at 01:16, Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote: > +The minimum block size represents the smallest addressable length and > +alignment within the export, although writing to an area that small > +may require the server to use a less-efficient read-modify-write > +action.
Having thought a bit more about this, I think we might (after all) need a client flag which says "I respect minimum block sizes" or "I respect block sizes" very early on in the negotiation. The reason why is this. Let's suppose I have a file backed NBD server. I'd really like to open my files with O_DIRECT in order to gain performance, but to do so I need to (a) advertise a minimum block size of 4096, and (b) (crucially) know the client will respect that. If my client doesn't tell me that, I'd open without O_DIRECT. Thoughts? -- Alex Bligh ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications Manager Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple tiers of your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial! https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z _______________________________________________ Nbd-general mailing list Nbd-general@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nbd-general
