On 1/10/19 9:11 AM, Nikolay Shirokovskiy wrote:
>>> The experimental command included an optional 'bitmap-export-name'
>>> field for remapping the name exposed over NBD to be different from
>>> the bitmap name stored on disk.
>>
>>
>> Nikolay, do you have comments on this?
>>
>>
>>However, my
On 10.01.2019 15:02, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> cc Nikolay
>
> 10.01.2019 10:13, Eric Blake wrote:
>> With the experimental x-nbd-server-add-bitmap command, there was
>> a window of time where an NBD client could see the export but not
>> the associated dirty bitmap, which can cause a
cc Nikolay
10.01.2019 10:13, Eric Blake wrote:
> With the experimental x-nbd-server-add-bitmap command, there was
> a window of time where an NBD client could see the export but not
> the associated dirty bitmap, which can cause a client that planned
> on using the dirty bitmap to be forced to tre
10.01.2019 10:13, Eric Blake wrote:
> With the experimental x-nbd-server-add-bitmap command, there was
> a window of time where an NBD client could see the export but not
> the associated dirty bitmap, which can cause a client that planned
> on using the dirty bitmap to be forced to treat the entir
With the experimental x-nbd-server-add-bitmap command, there was
a window of time where an NBD client could see the export but not
the associated dirty bitmap, which can cause a client that planned
on using the dirty bitmap to be forced to treat the entire image
as dirty as a safety fallback. Furt
