From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13 v3] Introduce device state 'failed', Hot spare and Auto replace
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 03:02:41 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <pan$18bc7$19b02793$bd43daae$43f1ae98@cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20160404221513.7fd31f8f@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de
Kai Krakow posted on Mon, 04 Apr 2016 22:15:13 +0200 as excerpted:
> Your argument would be less important if it did copy-back, tho... ;-)
FWIW, I completely misunderstood your description of copy-back in my
original reply, and didn't realize what you meant (and thus my mistaken
understanding) until I read some of the other replies today.
What I /thought/ you meant was some totally nonsense/WTF idea of keeping
the newly substituted hot-spare in place, and taking the newly vacated
"defective" device and putting it back in the the hot-spare list.
That rightly seemed stupid to me (it's a device just replaced as
defective, now you're putting it back as a hot-spare? WTF?), but that's
how I read what you were asking for and saying that other solutions did,
so...
Of course today when I read the other replies and realized what you were
/actually/ describing, returning the hot-spare to hot-spare status after
physically replacing the actually failed drive with a new one and
logically replacing the hot-spare with it in the filesystem, thereby
making the hot-spare a spare once again, my reaction was "DUH!! NOW it
makes sense!" But I was just going to let it go and go hide my original
misunderstanding in a hole somewhere.
But now you replied to my reply, so I figured I would reply back,
explaining what on earth I was thinking when I wrote it, and why it must
have seemed rather out of left field and didn't make much sense --
because what I was thinking you were suggesting /didn't/ make sense, but
of course that's because I totally misunderstood what you were suggesting.
So now my very-much-former misunderstanding is out of the hole and posted
for everyone to see and have a good laugh at, and I'm much the wiser on
what copy-back actually entails. =:^)
Tho it seems I was correct in the one aspect, currently ENotImplemented,
even if my idea of what you were asking to be implemented was totally and
completely off-the-wall wrong.
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-05 3:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-02 1:30 [PATCH 00/13 v3] Introduce device state 'failed', Hot spare and Auto replace Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 01/13] btrfs: Introduce a new function to check if all chunks a OK for degraded mount Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 02/13] btrfs: Do per-chunk check for mount time check Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 03/13] btrfs: Do per-chunk degraded check for remount Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 04/13] btrfs: Allow barrier_all_devices to do per-chunk device check Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 05/13] btrfs: Cleanup num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 06/13] btrfs: introduce BTRFS_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_SPARE_DEV Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 07/13] btrfs: add check not to mount a spare device Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 08/13] btrfs: support btrfs dev scan for " Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 09/13] btrfs: provide framework to get and put a " Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 10/13] btrfs: introduce helper functions to perform hot replace Anand Jain
2016-04-02 5:40 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-07 20:00 ` Yauhen Kharuzhy
2016-04-08 3:58 ` Anand Jain
2016-04-08 22:05 ` Yauhen Kharuzhy
2016-04-12 14:16 ` Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 11/13] btrfs: introduce device dynamic state transition to offline or failed Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 12/13] btrfs: check device for critical errors and mark failed Anand Jain
2016-04-02 1:30 ` [PATCH 13/13] btrfs: check for failed device and hot replace Anand Jain
2016-04-04 0:00 ` [PATCH 00/13 v3] Introduce device state 'failed', Hot spare and Auto replace Kai Krakow
2016-04-04 4:45 ` Duncan
2016-04-04 6:09 ` Duncan
2016-04-04 20:15 ` Kai Krakow
2016-04-05 3:02 ` Duncan [this message]
2016-04-04 6:19 ` Anand Jain
2016-04-04 20:07 ` Kai Krakow
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='pan$18bc7$19b02793$bd43daae$43f1ae98@cox.net' \
--to=1i5t5.duncan@cox.net \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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.