From: "Shankar Anand" <shanand@novell.com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,<nfsv4@linux-nfs.org>,
<nfs@lists.sourceforge.net>
Cc: "G.Allen Morris III" <gam3@gam3.net>,
Charles Lever <Charles.Lever@netapp.com>
Subject: Re: nfsstat for NFSv4
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 05:19:21 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44621990.AD69.00CC.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4460EC0F.AD69.00CC.0@novell.com>
*Sorry I am repeating my previous email as it was badly cluttered*
Hi,
> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> 5/9/2006 3:55:31 am >>>
>> On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 08:14:19 AM Shankar Anand wrote:
>> I have added some code for NFSv4 server statistics for
>> individual NFSv4 operations. I will submitting that to the
>> NFS community soon.
>> I have some questions:
>> 1. I noticed in Allen's patch for nfsstat for NFSv4 statistics
>> that he has taken into account only 32 NFSv4 operations.
>> Do you have any reasons for leaving out the other
>> operations (like PUTFH, SECINFO, SAVEFH)?
> At a guess: PUTFH and SAVEFH aren't particularly interesting,
> and SECINFO isn't implemented yet on the server
> (and isn't used yet on the client).
But the problem with this is that we skip operations in
between, which breaks the order of the operations given
in the RFC i.e. the linear order in which the statistics are
captured in the NFSv4 server.
Just want to know why this was done when capturing
the count for an extra procedure does not require much
extra effort, going by the existing code and actually
causes a break in the list of operation numbers.
>> 2. I understand that in NFSv3 server we write the statistics
>> into /proc/net/rpc/nfsd in the same order as the RPC
>> procedure numbers. Using the same logic, I have written
>> the NFSv4 statistics to be logged into /proc/net/rpc/nfsd
>> in the same order in which the operations are listed in
>> the NFSv4 RFC.
>> But the NFSv4 client statistics that are getting printed in
>> Allen's patch seem to be of a different order.
>> Why was this decided to be so?
It would be great if someone can answer this too.
Regards,
Shankar
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-10 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4452537B.AD69.00CC.0@novell.com>
[not found] ` <445B8B54.AD69.00CC.0@novell.com>
2006-05-08 14:14 ` nfsstat for NFSv4 Shankar Anand
2006-05-08 22:25 ` J. Bruce Fields
2006-05-09 13:52 ` Shankar Anand
2006-05-10 11:19 ` Shankar Anand [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=44621990.AD69.00CC.0@novell.com \
--to=shanand@novell.com \
--cc=Charles.Lever@netapp.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=gam3@gam3.net \
--cc=nfs@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=nfsv4@linux-nfs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.