Re: Messenger V2

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Ricardo Dias wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > By reading the old "msgr2 protocol" thread, and according to this
> > particular response (https://marc.info/?l=ceph-devel&m=147361359132535&;
> > w=2), I understood that the idea is to allow a daemon/client to
> > instantiate a V2 msgr instance in a new port, while still allowing a V1
> > msgr instance to exist.
> > 
> > I'm starting to make some changes to the msgr code, and I'm planning to
> > allow the specification of the protocol (V1 or V2) in the constructor.
> > This allows to create two messengers instances each one using a
> > different protocol and bonded to different ports.
> > Does this make sense?
> > 
> > Also, since we want to support multiple Ceph daemons (multiplexing) in
> > the same process, what would be the preferable API (messenger <-> Ceph
> > daemon) to be user:
> > 
> > a) Instantiate a single Messenger object and share the instance between
> > the multiple "sub-daemons"
> > b) Each "sub-daemon" instantiates a Messenger object, and the internal
> > Messenger code will take care of the magic of re-using/sharing the
> > connections to the same peers.
> 
> I agree with Casey that (a) seems more attractive.  It'll require a bit of 
> reworking things, though.  Right now we have like 6 Messengers used by the 
> OSD.  I have a PR that eliminates several of them (by consolidating 
> heartbeats onto the main messengers), but enen with that we'll need 2 
> separate instances, one for the public network and one for the cluster 
> network.  So I suspect we'll still need some capability to have mulitple 
> Messenger instances share some internal state.

Perhaps a good first step here is to finish this PR

	https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/15067

I dropped it leading up to luminous because I was hitting some 
non-obvious bug and other things were higher priority.  It's helpful on 
its own, though, and probably necessary lead-up to the multiplexing.  
Needs rebase and testing and review...

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



[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux