Re: [MirageOS-devel] Current persistent storage situation

[Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> On 27 Nov 2017, at 22:55, Sven Anderson <sven@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Am 22.11.2017 um 18:21 schrieb Tom Ridge <tom.j.ridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:tom.j.ridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>:
> 
>> But if you are happy to have the storage remote from the mirage machine
> 
> Actually, since we need multi-core support and in general multi-node
> support for the application, it would be of advantage if the design is
> based on a remote and concurrency-safe solution from the beginning. All
> local storage solutions would bring the problem of simultaneous storage
> device access I guess, because Lwt has no multicore support yet, and I
> would have to run an instance on each core, IIUC. 
> 
> So: I’m happy if it is remote, if too much performance impact can be
> avoided with caching and similar things.

For this usecase, you may also want to look at the Capnproto OCaml bindings,
since they provide a serializable capability RPC model that is probably
useful to tracking the provenance of keys as they flow through the system.

regards,
Anil
_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel