From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
To: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
"roman.penyaev@profitbricks.com" <roman.penyaev@profitbricks.com>,
"mail@fholler.de" <mail@fholler.de>,
"sagi@grimberg.me" <sagi@grimberg.me>,
"jinpu.wang@profitbricks.com" <jinpu.wang@profitbricks.com>,
"yun.wang@profitbricks.com" <yun.wang@profitbricks.com>,
"hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>, "axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>,
"danil.kipnis@profitbricks.com" <danil.kipnis@profitbricks.com>,
"Milind.dumbare@gmail.com" <Milind.dumbare@gmail.com>,
"dledford@redhat.com" <dledford@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: RDMA performance comparison: IBNBD, SCST, NVMEoF
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 18:22:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1492539735.2689.7.camel@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJrWOzAM_A6fwFxTZVo9MmiwWF1d6Bp9zTdBvUfnDFCPY_CmCQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 19:33 +0200, Roman Penyaev wrote:
> By current email I would like to share some fresh RDMA performance
> results of IBNBD, SCST and NVMEof, based on 4.10 kernel and variety
> of configurations.
Hello Roman,
Thank you for having shared these results. But please do not expect me
to have another look at IBNBD before the design bugs in the driver and
also in the protocol get fixed. The presentation during Vault 2017 made
it clear that the driver does not scale if more than two CPUs submit I/O
simultaneously at the initiator side. The comments Sagi posted should be
addressed but I haven't seen any progress from the IBNBD authors with
regard to these comments ...
See also:
* Danil Kipnis, Infiniband Network Block Device (IBNBD), Vault 2017
(https://vault2017.sched.com/event/9Xjw/infiniband-network-block-device-ibnbd-danil-kipnis-profitbricks-gmbh).
* Sagi Grimberg, Re: [RFC PATCH 00/28] INFINIBAND NETWORK BLOCK
DEVICE (IBNBD), March 27th, 2017
(https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg47879.html).
Best regards,
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-18 18:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-18 17:33 RDMA performance comparison: IBNBD, SCST, NVMEoF Roman Penyaev
2017-04-18 18:22 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2017-04-19 6:02 ` Roman Penyaev
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=1492539735.2689.7.camel@sandisk.com \
--to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=Milind.dumbare@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=danil.kipnis@profitbricks.com \
--cc=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jinpu.wang@profitbricks.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mail@fholler.de \
--cc=roman.penyaev@profitbricks.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=yun.wang@profitbricks.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox