Re: [Qemu-devel] BlockDriverState stack and BlockListeners

From: Ori Mamluk <omamluk@zerto.com>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Cc: "Kevin Wolf" <kwolf@redhat.com>,
	"תומר בן אור" <tomer@zertodata.com>, "עודד קדם" <oded@zerto.com>,
	dlaor@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	"Markus Armbruster" <armbru@redhat.com>,
	"Zhi Yong Wu" <zwu.kernel@gmail.com>,
	"Federico Simoncelli" <fsimonce@redhat.com>,
	"Yair Kuszpet" <yairk@zerto.com>,
	"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] BlockDriverState stack and BlockListeners
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 07:14:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F52FA48.9050903@zerto.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJSP0QWOd-q-W3LcV1THYy_XPTk2XPvdLth+v-B+iC22n-4HZA@mail.gmail.com>

On 03/03/2012 13:46, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Ori Mamluk<omamluk@zerto.com>  wrote:
>> I think the BlockFilter direction goes very well with our plans for a
>> replication module.
>> I guess it would take some discussions and time to form a solid layer for
>> the BlockFilters, and I'd like to move ahead in parallel with the
>> replication module.
> Will the replicatoin module still use a custom network protocol or do
> you plan to implement the in-process NBD server?
>
> I have added the in-process NBD server idea to the Google Summer of
> Code 2012 project ideas page.  Perhaps students will be interested in
> implementing it this summer.  But if you are already working on it I
> can remove the idea, please let me know.
>
> Thanks,
> Stefan
I prefer not to do it as NBD server, mainly because NBD by definition 
requires a port per volume and I think it will pose a management overhead.
So my current plan is a custom protocol - but it's still TBD.