On 26 Oct 2012, at 23:40, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
I have significant concerns about the design of TCP OOB as it was
described at EAKC2012.
On the contrary, I think Out of Band support for AFS is a very interesting
prospect. As I discussed with Andrew and Hartmut in Edinburgh, I think we could
Simon wrote:
On the contrary, I think Out of Band support for AFS is a very interesting
prospect.
At PDC, an infiniband based infrastructure carries bulk data inside
clusters, between clusters and between clusters and file servers
(Lustre). It uses the native infiniband transport. It would be
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:31:59 +0100
Simon Wilkinson simonxwilkin...@gmail.com wrote:
I do believe that we can make the current RX implementation
significantly faster - and that this will aid both bulk and metadata
operations. However, it is unlikely that we can ever reach the raw
performance
On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 18:40:38 -0400
Jeffrey Altman jalt...@your-file-system.com wrote:
Between AFS2 and AFS3 a decision was made to switch to UDP because the
file servers could not maintain enough open tcp connections to serve
all of the clients. While we might believe the days of TCP socket
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 06:40:38PM -0400, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
On 10/26/2012 5:03 PM, Andrew Deason wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 10:45:05 +0200
To provide a sense of ordering... rxgk standards work will definitely
precede tcp oob, though rxgk implementation may or may not. After rxgk,
some
