On Wed, 15 Jun 2016, Avner Ben Hanoch wrote: > Hi All, > > I tried to evaluate AsyncMessenger (together with its sub classes) and I > found its code great in my eyes. Still, when using it at runtime, Ceph > will warn you that this module is dangerous. In jewel we've removed the 'experimental' flag. Upgrade! > *I have two questions:* > 1. Considering pros and cons, are there any cons when using > AsyncMessenger instead of SimpleMessenger (like stability, or cpu/memory > consumption, .) Less CPU, fewer threads, nicer code. > 2. I am considering a variant of AsyncMessenger that might require that > both sides will be same messenger, I wonder, is it possible to use > AsyncMessenger for private network between OSDs only and to remain with > SimpleMessenger for all other messengers (for example, by just changing > the lines that creates the 6 Messengers in ceph_osd.cc::main) It's the same protocol as SimpleMessenger, so there is no need to run SimpleMessenger at all. (You can't currently use two types in the same process, but I don't think there's any need to.) sage -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
