From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Axel Thimm Subject: StorageWorks failover model (was: tools target for SLES9 SP2 and RHEL4 U2) Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 14:21:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20050612122138.GA16608@neu.nirvana> References: <1118341002.14457.23.camel@zezette> <20050609191541.GO15809@agk.surrey.redhat.com> <1118345693.14457.30.camel@zezette> Reply-To: device-mapper development Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1625580816==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1118345693.14457.30.camel@zezette> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com To: device-mapper development List-Id: dm-devel.ids --===============1625580816== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9amGYk9869ThD9tj" Content-Disposition: inline --9amGYk9869ThD9tj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 > Regards, --=20 Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net --9amGYk9869ThD9tj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCrCiHQBVS1GOamfERAgBUAJ4u7oYTRZgJ+rNqd/+/9OkhMXxNIwCgkAJx kBhZo1oMXP85B4SKUtuhyyQ= =vXOL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9amGYk9869ThD9tj-- --===============1625580816== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --===============1625580816==--