Greetings. Any progress on this? What's the hole-up? First it was that patches were tested. Then John reported success. No one is responsive?
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Thursday, July 8th, 2021 at 3:24 PM, sweetpotatopie2021 <sweetpotatopie2...@protonmail.com> wrote: > Hello again. > > I just wanted ask again if these patches can be expedited? > > Thes list showed one user (John at IBM) who reported success and transfer > rates of 7Gb/s. Without these patches I can get 200Mb/s max. > > I try to apply patches myself, but don't find easy compile instructions for > debian/ubuntu. Usually I use ppa. > > A million thanks again for all you do > > JR > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > > On Monday, May 24th, 2021 at 3:23 PM, sweetpotatopie2021 > sweetpotatopie2...@protonmail.com wrote: > > > Hi Ben, > > > > Thank you for replying. > > > > Is it possible that these might make it into an RC or release sometime soon? > > > > JR > > > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. > > > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > > > > On Thursday, May 13, 2021 7:32 PM, Benjamin Kaduk ka...@mit.edu wrote: > > > > > Hi John, > > > > > > My mailer thinks I did not respond to this yet, so my apologies if this is > > > > > > a duplicate. > > > > > > Thank you for reporting on your experiences; it does help indicate > > > > > > confidence in the readiness of the patches. > > > > > > -Ben > > > > > > On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 09:22:08PM -0500, John P Janosik wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Ben, > > > > > > > > We have been importing these patches into our IBM internal OpenAFS 1.8.X > > > > > > > > builds for over a year and have had our busiest cells running these > > > > > > > > versions since fall last year. We hit some deadlock issue early on but > > > > > > > > that was fixed and I believe those patches made it to gerrit as well. > > > > > > > > I did the work to get the patches to apply to the versions of OpenAFS we > > > > > > > > are running, but I don't feel confident calling it a review. I missed > > > > the > > > > > > > > deadlock issue until we actually put it into production :). > > > > > > > > John Janosik > > > > > > > > jpjan...@us.ibm.com > > > > > > > > From: Benjamin Kaduk ka...@mit.edu > > > > > > > > To: sweetpotatopie2021 sweetpotatopie2...@protonmail.com > > > > > > > > Cc: "openafs-devel@openafs.org" openafs-devel@openafs.org > > > > > > > > Date: 05/06/2021 09:00 PM > > > > > > > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OpenAFS-devel] Andrew Deason's OpenAFS RX > > > > > > > > performance patches > > > > > > > > Sent by: openafs-devel-ad...@openafs.org > > > > > > > > Hi JR, > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 02:48:39PM +0000, sweetpotatopie2021 wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear developers, > > > > > > > > > > First, a shout-out. I'd like to say a big "Thank you!" for the work > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > you do supporting OpenAFS by addressing security vulnerabilities and > > > > > > > > > > ensuring that it continues to work on each newly-released version of > > > > > (at > > > > > > > > > > least) Linux, Windows, and MacOS -- obviously the two most important > > > > > goals > > > > > > > > > > for keeping OpenAFS moving forward. > > > > > > > > > > However I have a plea: AFS has never noted as a real speed demon for > > > > > > > > > > data transfer. But its lack of performance is cited as a contributing > > > > > > > > > > factor leading some who might otherwise use AFS to consider > > > > > alternatives > > > > > > > > > > (smb, nfs, cloud). In early 2019, Andrew Deason proposed some changes > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > RX which promised performance gains without changing to TCP. See < > > > > > > > > > > https://openafs-workshop.org/2019/schedule/how-to-saturate-a-10g-link-with-an-openafs-rx-fileserver/ > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > Andrew submitted patches to OpenAFS's gerrit primarily affecting > > > > > > > > > > sendmmsg and recvmmsg (circa gerrit ~13601 - 13613) but it's > > > > > approaching > > > > > > > > > > two years later and from what I can tell, it doesn't look like these > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > made it into a released version yet. > > > > > > > > The patches are visible at > > > > > > > > https://gerrit.openafs.org/#/q/topic:recvmmsg+(status:open+OR+status:merged) > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > https://gerrit.openafs.org/#/q/topic:sendmmsg+(status:open+OR+status:merged) > > > > > > > > , and you are correct, the changes that actually have a performance > > > > impact > > > > > > > > have not been merged yet. (Some of the earlier cleanup commits have been > > > > > > > > merged.) > > > > > > > > > Can moving these changes forward to a released version of OpenAFS be > > > > > > > > > > prioritized? Removing "performance sucks," from the list of why sites > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > consider moving away from AFS would be wonderful, especially if the > > > > > work > > > > > > > > > > is complete -- or very close to complete. [It might also lead to it > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > considered more seriously by homelab users, SMB (small and medium > > > > > > > > > > business) techs, and others.] > > > > > > > > I'm sad to say that the main bottleneck here is myself. I'm the only > > > > > > > > person currently doing merges to master, and my time is spread quite > > > > thin > > > > > > > > (I'm an IETF Security Area Director, which is something that takes at > > > > > > > > least > > > > > > > > 15 hours a week and can take as much time as is available). This work is > > > > > > > > also competing for review time with patches to provide OS support for > > > > new > > > > > > > > OS versions, other bugfixes and cleanup that come in, rxgk support, and > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > underlying changes needed to bring in rxgk support. It's not all getting > > > > > > > > done, and that's not something I'm happy about, but I also don't have a > > > > > > > > clear path for changing that in the near future. > > > > > > > > The main thing that would help to get these changes merged would be > > > > > > > > careful > > > > > > > > code review (though most of these already have received positive > > > > reviews, > > > > > > > > so only a truly careful review would be expected to find new issues), > > > > and > > > > > > > > reports of successful stress testing of the code. > > > > > > > > -Ben > > > > > > > > OpenAFS-devel mailing list > > > > > > > > OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org > > > > > > > > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
