Hi Sam,

> Maybe part of the confusion that Walt&Co have is that the an array
> macro (3a_struct) always includes an extra uint32_t for the length of
> the array, but that field is not counted in the number used in the
> name of the macro.  For example:

Yep.. I think that was the same confusion I also had when I quickly
went through that header file.. :)
>
> You might argue that we should always just pad the array count, or use
> a 64 bit value for it, but I don't think Pete wanted to waste bytes in
> the request unless necessary.  Its hard to quibble about 4 bytes, but
> that design focus does help keep request messages under the eager
> message sizes of our protocols.

Sure.. Sorry for the confusion.. there is nothing that needs fixing here :)
thanks,
Murali
>
> -sam
>
>
> >
> >
> >> For those who are interested, the first thing we are working on is
> >> Phil's server-to-server enabled file create.  In the first step we
> >> are
> >> migrating the client create syscall functionality to the server,
> >> then we
> >> will work on implementing collective communication.  Right now we are
> >> trying to figure out to what extent we can use the new state machine
> >> features to simplify that by essentially starting a client state
> >> machine
> >> on the server.  Any input on that activity is encouraged.
> > Awesome!
> > Thanks,
> > Murali
> >>
> >> Walt
> >> --
> >> Dr. Walter B. Ligon III
> >> Associate Professor
> >> ECE Department
> >> Clemson University
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Pvfs2-developers mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pvfs2-developers mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers

Reply via email to