[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: FYI: A talk about using NBD as an alternative to loop device / loop mounting

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 10:46:53PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 09:51:17AM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > 
> > This video of a talk that I did might be of interest to NBD users:
> > 
> > https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2018/11/26/nbdkit-fosdem-test-presentation/#content
> > 
> > Direct video link:
> > 
> > http://oirase.annexia.org/rwmj.wp.com/rjones-nbdkit-tech-talk-2018-11-19.mp4
> Some comments:
> - I think the recommendation to require nbd 3.18 might be a bit strong
>   ;-) I agree that 3.17 is horribly broken (sorry 'bout that,
>   unfortunately my test suite didn't catch that), but older versions of
>   NBD should generally work (although perhaps with less features). I
>   would suggest you tell people instead to avoid 3.17 (or have them use
>   the -nonetlink option to work around the bug).
> - You compare NBD against the loop device. It might be interesting to
>   note that the original implementation of the NBD driver in the kernel
>   was fired off by doing "cp loop.c nbd.c"... (at least that's what the
>   comments at the top of that file used to say, I wasn't there)
> - I think the talk dives into technical minutiae fairly quickly; it
>   might be useful to have a bit more of an introduction on why nbd might
>   be a good idea.
> It's a nice talk, I'd love to see it at FOSDEM (if I'm going to make it
> there though, which might not be the case for personal reasons).

Thanks for the feedback, I'll try and incorporate it in the next/final


Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and
build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported.

Reply to: