lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: FC & MULTIPATH !? (any hope?)
On 2002-01-17T15:36:54,
Brian Beattie <alchemy@us.ibm.com> said:

> Probable enhancements to this would include, provideing a method to mark
> a path to not attempt this crude form of auto recovery and a way to mark
> a failed path as good. Finally a device wide flag to disable
> auto-recovery.
>
> A disadvantage to this approach is that it would potentially, multiply
> the amount or time it takes to ultimately fail the attempt, by the
> number of paths. This would seem to be acceptable since the alternative
> is to fail the operation when a good route might exist.
>
> I would appreciate any thoughts, flames, or suggestions.

Combined with the enhancements this makes a lot of sense.

The enhancements are very much required, especially the way to mark a path as
good again manually.

I would also liks easily parseable /proc file to query the status of a
multi-path device, including all paths associated with it.


Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>

--
Perfection is our goal, excellence will be tolerated. -- J. Yahl

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.066 / U:1.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site