From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: multipath-tools/path_priority pp_alua/rtpg.c p ...
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 08:06:36 -0600
Message-ID: <20111107140636.GU24133@ether.msp.redhat.com>
References: <20111024134132.32316.qmail@sourceware.org>
	<1320270710.16195.15.camel@lapoo.opensvc.com>
	<20111103215855.GS24133@ether.msp.redhat.com>
	<1320357858.16195.30.camel@lapoo.opensvc.com>
Reply-To: device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1320357858.16195.30.camel@lapoo.opensvc.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/options/dm-devel>,
	<mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:dm-devel@redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel>,
	<mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com
Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com
To: christophe.varoqui@opensvc.com
Cc: device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>
List-Id: dm-devel.ids

On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 11:04:18PM +0100, Christophe Varoqui wrote:
> On jeu., 2011-11-03 at 16:58 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 10:51:50PM +0100, Christophe Varoqui wrote:
> > > > --- multipath-tools/path_priority/pp_alua/rtpg.c	2009/08/18 21:12:02	1.3.2.5
> > > > +++ multipath-tools/path_priority/pp_alua/rtpg.c	2011/10/24 13:41:32	1.3.2.6
> > > > @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
> > > >  #include "rtpg.h"
> > > >  
> > > >  #define SENSE_BUFF_LEN  32
> > > > -#define DEF_TIMEOUT     300000
> > > > +#define DEF_TIMEOUT     60000
> > > >  
> > > 
> > > Do you want that part merged into upstream's alua prioritizer shared
> > > object ?
> > 
> > In the RHEL5 code, this is a seperate callout program.  Upstream it
> > would be better if we could make this configurable via multipath.conf,
> > like the checker timeouts.
> > 
> Sure, but you did not implement that in the callout either. Is the 60s
> timeout value controversial ? Is that change a worthy quick-fix ?

Sure.  We've had a number of complaints about how long multipath can get
stuck in some corner cases.  This was one that caused some problems, so
I'd be happy to see the default changed.

-Ben

> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Christophe Varoqui
> OpenSVC - Tools to scale
> http://www.opensvc.com/