From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Christie Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/4] dm-mpath: dynamic load balancers Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:12:17 -0600 Message-ID: <4981F181.2090905@cs.wisc.edu> References: <20080912.105038.102581623.k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com> <20090128153704.GA23158@agk.fab.redhat.com> <498157D1.2010105@ct.jp.nec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <498157D1.2010105@ct.jp.nec.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: device-mapper development Cc: Alasdair Kergon , stefan.bader@canonical.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: dm-devel.ids Kiyoshi Ueda wrote: > Hi Alasdair, > > On 01/29/2009 12:37 AM +0900, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:50:38AM -0400, Kiyoshi Ueda wrote: >>> The following patches add the following 2 dynamic load balancers >>> to request-based dm-multipath: >>> o queue-length oriented dynamic load balancer, dm-queue-length. >>> o service-time oriented dynamic load balancer, dm-service-time. >> >> Could we have separate Kconfig options to select them? > > Sure. > I posted the new one rebased on top of 2.6.29-rc2: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2009-January/msg00183.html > https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2009-January/msg00186.html > For the Kconfig help, is there something we could add to help people know when to choose one or the other? Sort of like how the block layer io scheduler (block/Kconfig.iosched) says one might be helpful for desktops and one is useful for data bses?