Sagi Grimberg wrote on 01/08/2015 05:45 AM:
RFC 3720 namely requires that iSCSI numbering is
session-wide. This means maintaining a single counter for all MC/S
sessions. Such a counter would be a contention point. I'm afraid that
because of that counter performance on a multi-socket initiator
Chris Leech cle...@redhat.com schrieb am 12.01.2015 um 20:24 in Nachricht
1421090651-8333-5-git-send-email-cle...@redhat.com:
try and keep existing CFLAGS from environment for packagers
---
iscsiuio/configure.ac | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
Chris Leech cle...@redhat.com schrieb am 12.01.2015 um 20:24 in Nachricht
1421090651-8333-3-git-send-email-cle...@redhat.com:
---
doc/iscsiadm.8 | 12 ++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/iscsiadm.8 b/doc/iscsiadm.8
index 9a945d1..05793b2 100644
On 1/12/2015 2:56 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 01/11/15 10:40, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
I would say there is no need for specific coordination from iSCSI PoV.
This is exactly what flow steering is designed for. As I see it, in
order to get the TX/RX to match rings, the user can attach 5-tuple
On 1/12/2015 10:05 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
On 01/11/2015 03:23 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
On 1/9/2015 8:00 PM, Michael Christie wrote:
SNIP
Session wide command sequence number synchronization isn't something to
be removed as part of the MQ work. It's a iSCSI/iSER protocol
requirement.
On 01/09/15 12:39, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
On 1/8/2015 4:11 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 01/08/15 14:45, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
Actually I started with that approach, but the independent connections
under a single session (I-T-Nexus) violates the command ordering
requirement. Plus, such a
Hi Mike, thanks for the reply. See below.
On Monday, January 12, 2015 at 11:22:41 AM UTC-8, Mike Christie wrote:
On 1/9/15, 8:28 PM, Thomas Dwyer III wrote:
Hi folks,
I spent some time browsing through this forum but I was unable to find
an
explanation for this comment referring
On Monday, January 12, 2015 at 12:54:38 PM UTC-8, Mike Christie wrote:
Thomas, let me know if your question was for functionality you needed or
just looking through the code and were curious.
It's functionality that I really want. In fact, I'm here in this forum
because strace on iscsid
On 01/12/2015 02:03 PM, tom...@gmail.com wrote:
How does incorrect ordering occur? This is TCP, right? Correct ordering
is guaranteed regardless of which interface(s) are used.
Software/implementation bugs.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On 01/12/2015 05:30 PM, Thomas Dwyer III wrote:
I think this would give administrators all the flexibility they need. Is
there a downside to this proposal that I'm not seeing?
You do not have to debug and support it, so that is why it was
ifdef/commented out :) I am open to accepting patches
On 01/13/2015 03:03 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
On 01/12/2015 05:30 PM, Thomas Dwyer III wrote:
I think this would give administrators all the flexibility they need. Is
there a downside to this proposal that I'm not seeing?
You do not have to debug and support it, so that is why it was
11 matches
Mail list logo
