From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <10af1064d3ac35a8d2f62214d5eec485@gmx.de> References: <10af1064d3ac35a8d2f62214d5eec485@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:31:47 -0600 Message-ID: From: Latchesar Ionkov To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] =?iso-8859-7?q?=F0p?= Topicbox-Message-UUID: 660fa7cc-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 What if the data your process needs is located on more than one server? Play ping-pong? Thanks, Lucho 2010/10/15 : > i wonder if making 9p work better over high latency connections is > even the right answer to the problem. =A0the real problem is that the > data your program wants to work on in miles away from you and > transfering it all will suck. =A0would 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... =A0but it poped up again when i read the "bring the computation > to the data" point from the ospray talk. > > -- > cinap > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From:=A0Francisco J Ballesteros > To:=A0Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> > Date:=A0Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:59:02 +0200 > Subject:=A0Re: [9fans] =F0p > 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 togethe= r (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, k= nows > 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. >> =A0You just have to eliminate the dependencies. >> I can imagine having a few concurrent queues of "requests" in a client t= hat >> 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 = on >>> >> 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 >>> > >>> >> >> > >