> On 8 Dec 2016, at 15:59, Eric Blake wrote:
>
> We should use similar wording to whatever we already say about what a
> client would see when reading data cleared by NBD_CMD_TRIM. After all,
> the status of STATE_HOLE set and STATE_ZERO clear is what you logically
> get when TRIM cannot guaran
On 12/08/2016 08:40 AM, Alex Bligh wrote:
>>> + metadata context is the basic "exists at all" metadata context.
>>>
>>> Disagree. You're saying that if a server supports metadata contexts
>>> at all, it must support this one.
>>
>> No, I'm trying to say that this metadata context exposes whether t
Wouter,
>> +- `NBD_OPT_META_CONTEXT` (10)
>> +
>> +Return a list of `NBD_REP_META_CONTEXT` replies, one per context,
>> +followed by an `NBD_REP_ACK`. If a server replies to such a request
>> +with no error message, clients
>>
>> "*the* server" / "*the* cient"
>>
>> Perhaps only an '
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 03:39:19AM +, Alex Bligh wrote:
>
> > On 2 Dec 2016, at 18:45, Alex Bligh wrote:
> >
> > Thanks. That makes sense - or enough sense for me to carry on commenting!
>
>
> I finally had some time to go through this extension in detail. Rather
> than comment on all the
On 12/06/2016 08:32 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi John
>
> Sorry for the late reply; weekend was busy, and so was monday.
>
No problems.
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 03:39:08PM -0500, John Snow wrote:
>> On 12/02/2016 01:45 PM, Alex Bligh wrote:
>>> John,
>>>
> +Some storage formats and op
Hi John
Sorry for the late reply; weekend was busy, and so was monday.
On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 03:39:08PM -0500, John Snow wrote:
> On 12/02/2016 01:45 PM, Alex Bligh wrote:
> > John,
> >
> >>> +Some storage formats and operations over such formats express a
> >>> +concept of data dirtiness. Whe
Hi Vladimir,
On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 02:26:28PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 01.12.2016 13:14, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
[...]
> > -- `NBD_ALLOC_ADD_CONTEXT` (2): the list of allocation contexts
> > +- `NBD_META_ADD_CONTEXT` (2): the list of metadata contexts
> > selec
01.12.2016 13:14, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Here's another update.
Changes since previous version:
- Rename "allocation context" to "metadata context"
- Stop making metadata context 0 be special; instead, name it
"BASE:allocation" and allow it to be selected like all other contexts.
- Clarify in
Here's another update.
Changes since previous version:
- Rename "allocation context" to "metadata context"
- Stop making metadata context 0 be special; instead, name it
"BASE:allocation" and allow it to be selected like all other contexts.
- Clarify in a bit more detail when a server MAY omit me
Hi, Wouter!
> Actually, come to think of that. What is the exact use case for this thing? I
> understand you're trying to create incremental backups of things, which would
> imply you don't write from the client that is getting the ?
> block status thingies, right?
Overall, the most desired use
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 06:07:56PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 29.11.2016 17:52, Alex Bligh wrote:
> > Vladimir,
> >> if the bitmap is 010101010101 we will have too many descriptors.
> >> For example, 16tb disk, 64k granularity -> 2G of descriptors
> >> payload.
> > Yep. And the co
Hi Vladimir,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 03:41:10PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 29.11.2016 13:50, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 06:33:24PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> However, I'm arguing that if we're going to provide inf
> On 29 Nov 2016, at 10:50, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> +- `NBD_OPT_ALLOC_CONTEXT` (10)
> +
> +Return a list of `NBD_REP_ALLOC_CONTEXT` replies, one per context,
> +followed by an `NBD_REP_ACK`. If a server replies to such a request
> +with no error message, clients MAY send NBD_CMD_B
Hi,
29.11.2016 13:50, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 06:33:24PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
However, I'm arguing that if we're going to provide information about
snapshots, we should be able to properly refer to these snapshots from
within an NBD context. My previous mail
29.11.2016 13:18, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.11.2016 um 20:17 hat Wouter Verhelst geschrieben:
3. Q: selecting of dirty bitmap to export
A: several variants:
1: id of bitmap is in flags field of request
pros: - simple
cons: - it's a hack. flags field is for other us
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 06:33:24PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> However, I'm arguing that if we're going to provide information about
> snapshots, we should be able to properly refer to these snapshots from
> within an NBD context. My previous mail suggested adding a negotiation
> message t
Am 27.11.2016 um 20:17 hat Wouter Verhelst geschrieben:
> > 3. Q: selecting of dirty bitmap to export
> >A: several variants:
> > 1: id of bitmap is in flags field of request
> > pros: - simple
> > cons: - it's a hack. flags field is for other uses.
> >
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 06:33:24PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 11:19:44AM +, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 08:17:14PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > Quickly: the reason I haven't merged this yes is twofold:
> > > - I wasn't t
Hi Wouter,
Some of this mess may be partially my fault, but I have not been
following the NBD extension proposals up until this point.
Are you familiar with the genesis behind this idea and what we are
trying to accomplish in general?
We had the thought to propose an extension roughly simil
Hi Stefan,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 11:19:44AM +, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 08:17:14PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Quickly: the reason I haven't merged this yes is twofold:
> > - I wasn't thrilled with the proposal at the time. It felt a bit
> > hackish, and bolte
On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 08:17:14PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Quickly: the reason I haven't merged this yes is twofold:
> - I wasn't thrilled with the proposal at the time. It felt a bit
> hackish, and bolted onto NBD so you could use it, but without defining
> everything in the NBD protoc
Hi Vladimir,
Quickly: the reason I haven't merged this yes is twofold:
- I wasn't thrilled with the proposal at the time. It felt a bit
hackish, and bolted onto NBD so you could use it, but without defining
everything in the NBD protocol. "We're reading some data, but it's not
about you". Th
22 matches
Mail list logo
