Re: Note about rbd_aio_write usage

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

 



On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Piotr Dałek <piotr.dalek@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> So I really see two problems here: lack of API docs and
> backwards-incompatible change in API behavior.

Docs are always in need of update, so any pull requests would be
greatly appreciated.

However, I disagree that the behavior has substantively changed -- it
was always possible for pre-Luminous to (sometimes) copy the buffer
before the "rbd_aio_write" method completed. With Luminous, this
behavior is more consistent -- but in a future release memory may be
zero-copied. If your application can properly conform to the
(unwritten) contract that the buffers should remain unchanged, there
would be no need for the application to pre-copy the buffers.

If the libfuse implementation requires that the memory is not-in-use
by the time you return control to it (i.e. it's a synchronous API and
you are using async methods), you will always need to copy it. The C++
API allows you to control the copying since you need to pass
"bufferlist"s to the API methods and since they utilize a reference
counter, there is no internal copying within librbd / librados.

-- 
Jason
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com




[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux