From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49667) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TJTW7-00042U-7D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:17:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TJTW6-0001Wo-6U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:17:55 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f173.google.com ([74.125.82.173]:41781) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TJTW6-0001Wb-05 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:17:54 -0400 Received: by weyt11 with SMTP id t11so4267690wey.4 for ; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 11:17:53 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <506C814B.1080305@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 20:17:47 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20120924091008.GJ18470@in.ibm.com> <20120924091340.GN18470@in.ibm.com> <506C5EB0.50508@redhat.com> <506C7CD5.6090407@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <506C7CD5.6090407@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] O_DIRECT on glusterfs (was Re: [PATCH v9 4/4] block: Support GlusterFS as a QEMU block backend) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anand Avati Cc: Kevin Wolf , Anthony Liguori , Vijay Bellur , Stefan Hajnoczi , Harsh Bora , Amar Tumballi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Richard W.M. Jones" , Blue Swirl , Avi Kivity , bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Daniel Veillard Il 03/10/2012 19:58, Anand Avati ha scritto: >> >> I think these 3 lines should be removed. We're bypassing the host >> buffer cache just by virtue of using a userspace driver, and that's what >> cache=none cares about. > > O_DIRECT also has an effect on the behavior of the "client side" (the > part within the qemu) of Gluster stack as well. I presume the intention > of O_DIRECT is to minimize use of memory (whether as host' page cache or > buffered data in user space). To that end it is a good idea to leave > O_DIRECT flag set. > > The behavior of whether gluster bricks need to get the O_DIRECT > propagated or not is a different issue. We are exploring the possibility > of not sending O_DIRECT flag over the wire to mimic NFS behavior. That > would be independent of the qemu block driver setting the open flag. What is the effect of O_DIRECT on the client exactly? Paolo