StorageWorks failover model (was: tools target for SLES9 SP2 and RHEL4 U2)

[Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@ATrpms.net>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1123 bytes --]

Hi,

On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 09:34:53PM +0200, christophe varoqui wrote:
> On jeu, 2005-06-09 at 20:15 +0100, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 08:16:42PM +0200, christophe varoqui wrote:
> > > Should we stabilize a 0.4.5 out of the git head
> be aware I broke the StorageWorks failover model to satisfy the
> expressed need to proactively fail paths in the DM when the checkers see
> them going down.

What does that mean for StorageWorks users? I'm currently setting up a
StorageWorks EVA3000 from scratch based on FC4 final. Will I stumble
into any pitfalls, or would that only affect gits users?

Thanks!

> StorageWorks hardware relied on the daemon to keep the paths in failover
> path groups to be in active state. That is no longer the case, now that
> we keep the DM path state in sync with checker states.
> 
> I guess to correct way to get back to a working model is to implement
> the DM path activation in a hardware handler. Dave Olien and Mike
> Christie have worked on such a handler. It needs debuging and testing.
> 
> Regards,

-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]