-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 136
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Allow configuring mbuffer
path and size separately for each destination (and source) system
#630
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
60f9651
bin/znapzendzetup: update documentation for --mbuffer option variants
jimklimov c81bf48
Refactor "mbuffer(_size)" settings to handle different variants for s…
jimklimov 4116359
README.md: clarify about requirements for a remote destination system
jimklimov ca510b0
README.md: update for src_mbuffer* [#629]
jimklimov dd30d3f
.github/workflows/spelling/expect.txt: update for mbuffer changes [#629]
jimklimov File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -339,6 +339,7 @@ manpath | |
manualsnap | ||
mariadb | ||
mariadblock | ||
Mbuf | ||
mbuffer | ||
mbuffersize | ||
MConfig | ||
|
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@oetiker : WDYT about the TOTHINK comment here?
If we checked and could not confirm the
mbuffer
presence on remote destination, should we still try piping through it on receiver? Maybe there's a miracle like some shell alias or profile function to take care of it... we did warn about possible broken sending.The alternative is - if we could not confirm its presence, set to
undef
oroff
here, and avoid using it at all. So SSH pipes right intozfs recv
, maybe sub-optimally, but reliably. On the downside, the user never gets a nudge to actually fix their setup and optimize the transfer with buffering.Now that I think of it,
znapzendzetup list
probably uses these methods (it does try to go to remote and confirm stuff), so resetting the values (perhaps forsrc_mbuffer
above also) may be not a very good idea for visibility of on-disk setup; it does however represent the currently active setup (what would be executed if we run this right now).So, I have a simmering concern but no particular opinion about what is "right" here, at the moment. Any inputs? :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
with things like this I am a fan of the software not trying to guess and hoping for a lucky strike
if there is no mbuffer at the remote end as promissed, things should fail ... clear and simple
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hm, that
src_mbuffer=undef
is seen if you search for it e.g. in config printout (not practically an issue -- is handled insendRecvSnapshots()
asoff
):Note how
dst_0_mbuffer
is not defined in the properties and gets inherited from legacymbuffer
-- maybe the right thing forsrc_mbuffer
is to fall it back asoff
instead ofundef
after all (unless in "networked mbuffer" mode)?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, nice:
Oh the edge cases :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Posted a couple of fixes as #632