[lkml]   [1996]   [Jun]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Ideas for v2.1 (DUPRE Christophe) writes:

    >Not really a good idea : Let's say you have IDE and SCSI disks:
    >/dev/hda, /dev/hdb, /dev/sda and /dev/sdb

    >With your system, you'd have:
    >/dev/hda -> /dev/diska
    >/dev/hdb -> /dev/diskb
    >/dev/sda -> /dev/diskc
    >/dev/sdb -> /dev/diskd

    >Now one IDE disk is crashed and you remove it. Thus /dev/hdb no longer
    >exists, and you get this mapping:
    >/dev/hda -> /dev/diska
    >/dev/sda -> /dev/diskb
    >/dev/sdc -> /dev/diskc

    So, lets see, how it is currently:

    I have

    /dev/hda -> IDE
    /dev/sda -> SCSI ID0
    /dev/sdb -> SCSI ID3
    /dev/sdc -> SCSI ID4
    /dev/sdd -> SCSI ID5

    Now I remove SCSI ID3. 'drive does not spin underwater error'

    /dev/sda -> SCSI ID0
    /dev/sdb -> SCSI ID4
    /dev/sdc -> SCSI ID5


    Not too different from the scheme you criticized above. But it is
    already in there. And IMHO it sucks. :-(


    Henning Schmiedehausen ...side by side in orbit... around a fairer SUN.

    In accordance with the normal UNIX design philosophy nuke(8) does not
    prevent you from nuking yourself. -- nuke(8) manpage

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:3.292 / U:1.204 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site