* Daniel P. Berrangé (berra...@redhat.com) wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 01:56:24PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Kevin Wolf (kw...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > I guess it would be nice to have a single namespace for everything in > > > QEMU, but the reality is that we have a few separate ones. As long as we > > > consistently add a prefix that identifies the namespace in question, I > > > think that would work. > > > > > This means that if we're using node-name to identify the NBD connection, > > > the namespace should be 'block' rather than 'nbd'. > > > > > > One more thing to consider is, what if a single object has multiple > > > connections? In the case of node-names, we have a limited set of allowed > > > characters, so we can use one of the remaining characters as a separator > > > and then suffix a counter. In other places, the identifier isn't > > > restricted, so suffixing doesn't work. Maybe prefixing does, but it > > > would have to be there from the beginning then. > > > > Yeh I worry about whether on nbd if you can have multiple nbd > > connections to one block device. > > The kernel NBD driver now supports multiple parallel connections. > QEMU hasn't implemented this in its NBD code yet, but I certainly > see that being in scope for future.
It's not parallel for performance that worries me, it's more about separateq connections for separate uses - e.g. if we're serving the same read-only disk to multiple separate things. Dave > > Regards, > Daniel > -- > |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| > |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| > |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK