Hi Trond, I appreciate your point of view. I appreciate Rick's comments. I hope some other comments will trickle in. Do I think you and Rick are saying the same thing? Not really. Do I think you're making sense when you imply I want to change the standard? No, I don't follow that. BIND_CONN_TO_SESSION is in the published standard. Can I show a dedicated back channel improves performance? Not at present. That's a sensible question. I think if the protocol in general is doing what it is intended to do, it should be possible for some workloads, at some point. (If callbacks are, somehow generally detrimental to performance, as you state, I think maybe we have some more work to do.) (I note only one more thing--I did raise this topic on list 12 months ago. Only Bruce commented, at the time.) Thanks again, Matt -- Matt Benjamin The Linux Box 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 http://linuxbox.com tel. 734-761-4689 fax. 734-769-8938 cel. 734-216-5309 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
