> Reading through that, it sounds like a well thought out approach. Thanks! > Did you consider a super-lightweight version first, which only has > a process listening on one port for multiplexing traffic, and then > passes the traffic to individual processes running on the server? > > eg similar to how common IPv4 NAT does, but for gluster traffic Yes, I thought about it. Depending on how it's done, it could alleviate the too-many-ports problem, but it doesn't really address the uncontrolled contention for CPU, memory, and so on. In a way it would make that worse, as it's one more process to keep switching in and out among the others. Sure would have been nice, though. _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
