From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org" <lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Lsf] Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 08:53:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5722320E.5080202@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461858038.2307.16.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
On 04/28/2016 08:40 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> Well, the entire room, that's vendors, users and implementors
> complained that path failover takes far too long. I think in their
> minds this is enough substance to go on.
The only complaints I heard about path failover taking too long came
from people working on FC drivers. Aren't SCSI transport layer
implementations expected to fail I/O after fast_io_fail_tmo expired
instead of waiting until the SCSI error handler has finished? If so, why
is it considered an issue that error handling for the FC protocol can
take very long (hours)?
Thanks,
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-28 15:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-27 23:39 Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM James Bottomley
2016-04-28 12:11 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-04-28 15:40 ` James Bottomley
2016-04-28 15:53 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2016-04-28 16:19 ` [Lsf] " Knight, Frederick
2016-04-28 16:37 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-04-28 17:33 ` James Bottomley
2016-04-28 16:23 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-28 16:41 ` [dm-devel] " Bart Van Assche
2016-04-28 16:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-29 21:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-29 21:51 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-30 0:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-04-30 0:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-02 18:49 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-05-02 19:28 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-02 22:28 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-05-03 17:44 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-26 2:38 ` bio-based DM multipath is back from the dead [was: Re: Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM] Mike Snitzer
2016-05-27 8:39 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 8:39 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 14:44 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-05-27 15:42 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 15:42 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 16:10 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-04-29 16:45 ` [dm-devel] Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM Benjamin Marzinski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5722320E.5080202@sandisk.com \
--to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.