Hi WeWe, Paul,
As long as I understand, currently SPDK read configuration from configuration file and
keep configuration only in memory.
SPDK does not have nonvolatile dynamically changeable configuration database yet.
Developing configuration database into SPDK will be cumbersome.
If Cyborg takes that role, we may be able to get one simple storage system.
This is just an idea I have not pursued this yet.
差出人: SPDK <spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org> が Luse, Paul E <paul.e.luse(a)intel.com>
送信日時: 2018年1月11日 10:37
宛先: Storage Performance Development Kit
件名: [!]Re: [SPDK] Add py-spdk client for SPDK
Thanks for continuing to work on this, the progress sounds encouraging! I haven’t looked
at it yet but it seems like there are opportunities beyond Cyborg for this and I have to
admit I don’t totally see how SPDK, as a SW solution, fits the Cyborg model. As with my
last comment on your patch I think it would be great if you could explain your vision a
bit more both with Cyborg and beyond. I believe this would generate more interest in
getting some eyes on this. Personally I will make a commitment to look at it before the
end of the week.
From: SPDK [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of We We
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 6:46 AM
To: Storage Performance Development Kit <spdk(a)lists.01.org>
Subject: [SPDK] Add py-spdk client for SPDK
I have submitted the py-spdk code on https://review.gerrithub.io/#/c/379741/
, please take
some time to visit it, I will be very grateful to you.
The py-spdk is client which can help the upper-level app to communicate with the
SPDK-based app (such as: nvmf_tgt, vhost, iscsi_tgt, etc.). Should I submit it into the
other repo I rebuild rather than SPDK repo? Because I think it is a relatively independent
kit upon the SPDK.
If you have some thoughts about the py-spdk, please share with me.