From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <10af1064d3ac35a8d2f62214d5eec485@gmx.de> To: 9fans@9fans.net Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 18:19:50 +0200 From: cinap_lenrek@gmx.de In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-prgvnhrtgqutkmxwilqvfcksqq" Subject: Re: [9fans] =?utf-8?b?z4Bw?= Topicbox-Message-UUID: 65fd6fe4-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-prgvnhrtgqutkmxwilqvfcksqq Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit i wonder if making 9p work better over high latency connections is even the right answer to the problem. the real problem is that the data your program wants to work on in miles away from you and transfering it all will suck. would it not be cool to have a way to teleport/migrate your process to a cpu server close to the data? i know, this is a crazy blue sky idea that has lots of problems on its own... but it poped up again when i read the "bring the computation to the data" point from the ospray talk. -- cinap --upas-prgvnhrtgqutkmxwilqvfcksqq Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <9fans-bounces+cinap_lenrek=gmx.de@9fans.net> Delivered-To: GMX delivery to cinap_lenrek@gmx.de Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2010 15:01:30 -0000 Received: from gouda.swtch.com (EHLO gouda.swtch.com) [67.207.142.3] by mx0.gmx.net (mx003) with SMTP; 15 Oct 2010 17:01:30 +0200 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=gouda.swtch.com) by gouda.swtch.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <9fans-bounces@9fans.net>) id 1P6lkX-0007VC-IG; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:59:13 +0000 Received: from mail-pw0-f49.google.com ([209.85.160.49]) by gouda.swtch.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P6lkV-0007Ue-OJ for 9fans@9fans.net; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:59:11 +0000 Received: by pwi2 with SMTP id 2so393915pwi.36 for <9fans@9fans.net>; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 07:59:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QBkf2QoiMWfqNTsXS7fW/4xjpogsjaiK4S6vJ9BOao4=; b=QFOkkE6vocbriKWBLdMuFGweFn/F8W8a9GKg2j2sJC4EXRyIL6Tgv2Ojri7k89Tjdy 9ciEFdC/i/TYf5l8qyNz0gvJlJE8Em9nEeYDPp6otMM/BW5DcPoPSbfW/VQEl/RVrFnK 9oW+aD64XiwxxIZXDT9BgqO1nQRkQQo7L6JvE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=Ql/NnxZToA80k8sTB1RHru5e6JQMwt/moKMcE7/yrVKf6k5cJWV8vaTFoNPLeOW8pH vMUv6QYgmRaam22bcriMYrjqhu+HltSO6DbkFsl2dwM0tsEaj7DlR59lBAq2DGoSFMUJ QKWG96So2BD3myZn7fZcPXkPSQ2Xc7yBG9Wfg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.213.16 with SMTP id l16mr638495wfg.333.1287154742908; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 07:59:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.165.13 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 07:59:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:59:02 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: nrsn6ff-Npr84Edl-21me5UrEPg Message-ID: From: Francisco J Ballesteros To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] =?utf-8?b?z4Bw?= X-BeenThere: 9fans@9fans.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.10 Precedence: list Reply-To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.9fans.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: 9fans-bounces@9fans.net Errors-To: 9fans-bounces+cinap_lenrek=gmx.de@9fans.net X-GMX-Antivirus: 0 (no virus found) X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (Mail was not recognized as spam); Detail=5D7Q89H36p77e5KAPs1l6v/Sb97LojnDtMgfETrECMLUO9erHzOJe+OynZRhvlGqb5A0X bbiCt2rAnnct/NAlbHMvoAL6GY+23tB3khNK7avqRsgMMVBwlWgrgcyEiCy6eQ7DbfhonniFyqTI PpJNA==V1; It's not just that you can stream requests or not. If you have caches in the path to the server, you'd like to batch together = (or stream or whatever you'd like to call that) requests so that if a client is reading a file and a single rpc suffices, the cache, in the worst case, kno= ws that it has to issue a single rpc to the server. Somehow, you need to group requests to retain the idea that a bunch of requests have some meaning as a whole. 2010/10/15 David Leimbach : > > > 2010/10/14 Latchesar Ionkov >> >> It can't be dealt with the current protocol. It doesn't guarantee that >> Topen will be executed once Twalk is done. So can get Rerrors even if >> Twalk succeeds. >> > > It can be dealt with if the scheduling of the pipeline is done properly. > =C2=A0You just have to eliminate the dependencies. > I can imagine having a few concurrent queues of "requests" in a client th= at > contain items with dependencies, and running those queues in a pipelined = way > against a 9P server. > >> >> 2010/10/13 Venkatesh Srinivas : >> >> 2) you can't pipeline requests if the result of one request depends o= n >> >> the >> >> result of a previous. for instance: walk to file, open it, read it, >> >> close >> >> it. >> >> if the first operation fails, then subsequent operations will be >> >> invalid. >> > >> > Given careful allocation of FIDs by a client, that can be dealt with - >> > operations on an invalid FID just get RErrors. >> > >> > -- vs >> > >> > > --upas-prgvnhrtgqutkmxwilqvfcksqq--