Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...

[Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>]

Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 2:44 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> Vlad appears to be asserting that SCST is more feature-complete that LIO
>> at this point. It also seems that LIO is somewhat younger than SCST. So
>> at this point it might be interesting to see:
>>
>> 1. What are the shortcomings of SCST design compared to LIO and why LIO
>> developers chose to come with their own solution instead of
>> collaborating with SCST folks?
>>
>> 2. What features are missing from SCST that are currently available in
>> LIO?
>>
>> Once this is sorted out and [most] everyone agrees that LIO is indeed
>> technically superior (even if maybe not as mature yet) solution, then it
>> would make sense to request SCST developers to go to file/line depth of
>> the review.
> 
> You seem to have missed the start of this thread. The design of SCST
> is significantly more advanced than that of LIO, and it has already
> been explained in this thread why
> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg45856.html).
> 
Hmm. That link seems to be misrouted. I was hoping for a design
overview of SCST there; however it's just a complain to
James Bottomley etc.

Care to send the correct link?

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke		      zSeries & Storage
hare@suse.de			      +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html