From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 12:51:35 +0200 From: Lars Marowsky-Bree To: Lars Ellenberg Subject: Re: [Drbd-dev] Another drbd race Message-ID: <20040904105135.GH11820@marowsky-bree.de> References: <20040819110202.GO9601@marowsky-bree.de> <20040819113205.GP9601@marowsky-bree.de> <200408201452.52512.philipp.reisner@linbit.com> <20040904094814.GE11820@marowsky-bree.de> <20040904100008.GA14645@nudl> <20040904101813.GF11820@marowsky-bree.de> <20040904104338.GA16617@nudl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20040904104338.GA16617@nudl> Cc: drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com List-Id: Coordination of development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 2004-09-04T12:43:38, Lars Ellenberg said: > I did not say we need either/or, I say I want an _additional_ timeout, Ah, misread that. Ok, then we agree. Seems ok. > won't need to, but it won't lose any writes anymore). Of course we can > optimize, and I'd like to; but we need to be correct first. > so don't argue if you don't disagree. I wasn't realizing I wasn't disagreeing ;-) I thought you meant the additional timeout relative to the current situation and instead of the resume. Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée -- High Availability & Clustering \\\ /// SUSE Labs, Research and Development \honk/ SUSE LINUX AG - A Novell company \\//