Re: [9fans] Re: Dual dialing/forking sessions to increase 9P throughput

[hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>]

> The problem is that throughput and responsiveness are enemies.
no. not throughput, but buffer sizes are the enemy of latency

> you're trying to push a large quantity of data down a TCP connection,
> and try to do anything interactive over that same connection, the
> latency will make that interaction very slow

no. you have full freedom to prioritize the interactive part on
application layer (since you mention TCP layer).

> the transport medium needs to know how to differentiate
> between the two kinds of traffic.
no, any other layer could also differentiate the traffic.

> you would need a way to set different TCP options on 9P messages for different purposes.

TCP doesn't differentiate well. TCP fairness is not fine-grained
enough for this, so i still don't think the transport layer is well
suited.

what we really need is 9p (file/fd) level distributed scheduling.

>
> "Joe S" <joe@lifesoftserv.com> writes:
>
>> Maybe a file server thats purpose is to mux parts of another file
>> sounded like fun. My thoughts are that you could then transer thoes
>> chunks on a single destination on seperate connections.
> 
> I might be possible to create a file server which interposes itself
> between a 9P client and 9P server and bonds multiple network connections
> together into a single 9P session.  It would be sort of a userspace
> replacement for the kernel's mount driver.  Wait a minute, this problem
> can be solved with a filesystem?  Of course... I should have thought of
> that.  ;)

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Te69bb0fce0f0ffaf-M8679a1e06d55c6877dbfbdfe
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription