Re: [9fans] πp

[dorin bumbu <bumbudorin@gmail.com>]

ok, let's say that i want to read a 2 gb file :)

2010/10/16  <cinap_lenrek@gmx.de>:
> when you are in kiev, video streams YOU!
>
> --
> cinap
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: dorin bumbu <bumbudorin@gmail.com>
> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 02:30:42 +0300
> Subject: Re: [9fans] πp
> 2010/10/16 erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>:
>> On Fri Oct 15 17:14:18 EDT 2010, bumbudorin@gmail.com wrote:
>>> 2010/10/15 erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>:
>>> >> isn't tag field for this intended?
>>> >
>>> > [...]
>>> >
>>> >> so this means to me that a client can send some T-messages and then
>>> >> (or concurrently) wait the R-messages.
>>> >> in inferno from mount(1) and styxmon(8) i deduced that this case is
>>> >> also considered.
>>> >> it's true that most of the servers i seen until now doesn't take
>>> >> advantage of this feature, they respond to each T-message before
>>> >> processing next message.
>>> >
>>> > there is no defined limit to the number of
>>> > outstanding tags allowed. [...]
>>>
>>> so the real problem is not 9p itself than the transport protocol: TCP/IP.
>>
>> the transport has nothing to do with it;
>
>
> consider the following (imaginary) example:
>
> let say that i want to watch a live videocast, and i am in kiev and
> the video is emitted from seattle as a 9p service.
> i'll mount that service in my local namespace, and my imaginary video
> player istead of processig 9p messages in traditional way:
> [...] TRead -> RRead -> TRead -> RRead -> TRead -> [...]
>
> will have one thread that:  [...] TRead -> TRead-> TRead->
> TRead->TRead->TRead -> [...]
> and another one that :      [...]  <--     t0      -->RRead -> RRead->
> RRead -> RRead-> RRead-> RRead-> [...]
>
>
> if transport protocol hasn't anything to do with, please explain me
> what other drawbacks will be involved other than a t0 delay, if
> latency would be constant?
>
>>
>>> i think that a solution might be to run 9p over an information
>>> dispersal based protocol, to eliminate roundtrips but guaranteeing
>>> reliability.
>>
>> the definitiion of 9p relies on having round trips.
>
> i was reffering on TCP/IP's roundtrips for each package confirmation,
> and not to eliminate 9p's round trips.
> in 9p case i suggested to process some of them as i wrote on previous
> lines, when high data traffic is involved, like in video streaming.
>
>>
>> - erik
>>
>>
>
>