From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35329) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9eAb-0004Ks-BK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:39:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9eAS-00034Y-P7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:39:05 -0400 Received: from e23smtp06.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.148]:43656) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9eAS-00032y-77 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:38:56 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp06.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 01:37:36 +1000 Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (d23av02.au.ibm.com [9.190.235.138]) by d23relay05.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q86FT8Q417432802 for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 01:29:09 +1000 Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av02.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q86FcHXf019591 for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 01:38:18 +1000 Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 21:10:04 +0530 From: Bharata B Rao Message-ID: <20120906154004.GB20421@in.ibm.com> References: <20120809130010.GA7960@in.ibm.com> <20120809130216.GC7960@in.ibm.com> <5028F815.40309@redhat.com> <20120814043801.GB24944@in.ibm.com> <502A0C66.3060107@redhat.com> <20120814093430.GE24944@in.ibm.com> <502A2140.9050703@redhat.com> <50485EF0.70505@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50485EF0.70505@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 2/2] block: Support GlusterFS as a QEMU block backend Reply-To: bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: Kevin Wolf , Anthony Liguori , Anand Avati , Stefan Hajnoczi , Vijay Bellur , Amar Tumballi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Blue Swirl , Paolo Bonzini On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 11:29:36AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 08/14/2012 12:58 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > >> While we are at this, let me bring out another issue. Gluster supports 3 > >> transport types: > >> > >> - socket in which case the server will be hostname, ipv4 or ipv4 address. > >> - rdma in which case server will be interpreted similar to socket. > >> - unix in which case server will be a path to unix domain socket and this > >> will look like any other filesystem path. (Eg. /tmp/glusterd.socket) > >> > >> I don't think we can fit 'unix' within the standard URI scheme (RFC 3986) > >> easily, but I am planning to specify the 'unix' transport as below: > >> > >> gluster://[/path/to/unix/domain/socket]/volname/image?transport=unix > >> > >> i,e., I am asking the user to put the unix domain socket path within > >> square brackets when transport type is unix. > >> > >> Do you think this is fine ? > > > > Never saw something like this before, but it does seem reasonable to me. > > Excludes ] from the valid characters in the file name of the socket, but > > that shouldn't be a problem in practice. > > Bikeshedding, but I prefer > > gluster:///path/to/unix/domain/socket:/volname/image?transport=unix So if the unix domain socket is /tmp/glusterd.socket, then this would look like: gluster:///tmp/glusterd.socket:/volname/image?transport=unix. So you are saying : will the separator b/n the unix domain socket path and rest of the URI components. Unless you or others strongly feel about this, I would like to go with [ ] based spec, which I feel is less prone to errors like missing a colon by mistake :) > > as being more similar to file://, or even > > gluster:///path/to/unix/domain/socket/volname/image?transport=unix > > with the last two components implied to be part of the payload, not the > path. Note that image is a file path by itself like /dir1/a.img. So I guess it becomes difficult to figure out where the unix domain socket path ends and rest of the URI components begin w/o a separator in between. Regards, Bharata.