On Wed, 2020-10-07 at 14:04 -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote: > On 7 Oct 2020, at 12:44, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > I did see Igor's claim that there is a QoS issue (which afaics > > would > > also affect NFSv3), but why do I care about QoS as a per-mountpoint > > feature? > > Because it's hard to do QoS without being able to classify the > traffic on > the network somehow. The separate connection makes it a lot > easier. I see > how that's - not our problem -, though. > > The regular admin might find it surprising to tell their system to > connect to a specific IP address at mount time, and it instead sends > the > mount's traffic elsewhere. > > Are you happy with the state of nconnect, or is there room for > something > more dynamic? > I think there is room for improvement. We did say that we wanted to eventually hand control over to a userspace policy daemon which should be able to manage the number of connections based on demand and networking conditions. However as I already pointed out, NFSv4.1 also has congestion control at the session level which may be playing a role here. -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
