Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> Mike Christie wrote:
>> Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> [ .. ]
>>> Fsck. You are correct.
>> But you still might be hitting a problem where the target does not like 
>> data-outs when it closed the window. Maybe they interpreted the RFC 
>> differently. You should ask the HP target guys for more info.
>> Also your patch might be working because I think it ends up throttling 
>> the connection, so IO does not timeout because pipes are backed up (the 
>> slow down from the throttling is one of the problems we hit with the 
>> patch I did before which was pretty much the same as you posted).
> I actually had quite good results with it, so it can't be too bad :-)
> IE the test HPs running continued for over a day, whereas previously
> it'd stall after some hours.

Yeah, I saw the bz update too.

I tested your patch out here localy just to double check that is works 
like what we had before. With a istor target write throughput goes from 
50 MB/s to 15 MB/s. It eventually dies (ping timeout) because the window 
is closed and it does not open until we finish sending the data-outs for 
the currently running commands. So READs are just fine. We hit the 
window closed check but we continue to make progress on the READs 
because data-ins are processed like normal and the window opens back up 
as commands are completed.

So someone is doing something screwy. I am testing a EQL box locally now 
and will try some others just to double check.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"open-iscsi" group.
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi

Reply via email to