Il 19/03/2013 19:27, Michael R. Hines ha scritto: >>> >> That however gives me an idea... Instead of the full drain at the end >> of an iteration, does it make sense to do a "partial" drain at every >> chunk full, so that you don't have > N bytes pending and the downtime is >> correspondingly limited? > > > Sure, you could do that, but it seems overly complex just to avoid > a single flush() call at the end of each iteration, right?
Would it really be that complex? Not having an extra QEMUFile op perhaps balances that complexity (and the complexity remains hidden in rdma.c, which is an advantage). You could alternatively drain every N megabytes sent, or something like that. But a partial drain would help obeying the maximum downtime limitations. Paolo
