From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mescal.linbit (213-229-1-138.sdsl-line.inode.at [213.229.1.138]) by mail.linbit.com (LINBIT Mail Daemon) with ESMTP id 513C1142F8 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 16:52:11 +0200 (CEST) From: Philipp Reisner To: drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com Subject: Re: [Drbd-dev] 0.7.1 release... Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 16:52:10 +0200 References: <200407271028.23677.philipp.reisner@linbit.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <200407271652.10600.philipp.reisner@linbit.com> Sender: drbd-dev-admin@lists.linbit.com Errors-To: drbd-dev-admin@lists.linbit.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Coordination of development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: On Tuesday 27 July 2004 15:05, Lars Ellenberg wrote: > / 2004-07-27 10:28:23 +0200 > > \ Philipp Reisner: > > Hi, > > > > Ich habe vor gegen ende der Woche 0.7.1 zu taggen. > > * Damit XFS nun wirklich mit DRBD stable funktioniert > > * Damit ein upgrade Guide 0.6.x -> 0.7.x enthalten ist > > > > sonstige TODOs (soweit ich das bis jetzt sehe): > > * agree on the sprache die hier gespoken wird :-) > :) Ok, I bin for Englisch. Although all auf the list deutschsprachig sind. > > * Increment the primary-count if someone types in "yes" at the user's > > dialog > > the "human" count? or which one? Oh, right, the human count of course. > --> why? it is not primary yet... > hm. > maybe set some "mdf_inc_human_if_we_go_primary_while_unconnected", > and ... you get the idea ... > but this seems to be a litlle hackish. > > > * Make sure the timeout-count is increased if the timeout is expired > > at the user's dialog > > yes. but still, actually it only needs to increase these, > when we go primary. > so set here a flag "mdf_inc_timeout_cnt_if_we_go_primary_while_unconnected" > > be sure that nothing ugly can happen when > both go down. come back again, but link is broken. > both timeout / admin says yes to one of them. > one of the nodes is 0.7.0 ... > eventually they connect... now they should still do the right thing. My initial idea was that drbdadm should simply do a drbdsetup /dev/nbX primary --human | --timeout-expired drbdsetup /dev/nbX secondary The better implementation would be ( I guess this is what you mean) drbdsteup /dev/nbX on_primary --increase-human drbdsteup /dev/nbX on_primary --increase-timeout-expired ... I will go that way... > > * Make the ":sendpage fallback/total: %lu/%lu\n" more aggressive towards > > XFS. "drbd0: XFS's erronous IO requests detected. Workaround engaged." > > and display that with every statistic report ... > and increase that from INFO to WARN ... > no problem with that one, > the more people point at xfs, the more likely it is fixed sooner :) > Right. > > derzeit nur ein paar ideen, kein code. > > == VALID_POINTER == > > paranoia: > evtl. noch ein __range_ok(pointer,sizeof(whatever)) > mit in das macro einbauen... > > == benchmark == > > was ist mit deinem "benchmark"? > willst du den rauswerfen, oder auf 0.7 updaten? > soll ich das in ein cth script umwandeln? > > an alle: es wäre sicher nett, einen generischen benchmark zu haben. > was wäre sinnvoll zu sammeln? > nodeinfo: > /proc/cpuinfo (komplett?) > uname -a > lsmod ? > lspci ? > networkinfo: > ping? > bing? > ?? > io-info: > hdparm ? > tiobench? > philipps "dm.c"? > mein "wbtest.c"? > ohne, unconnected, connected, on synctarget, on syncsource, > protocol A,B,C ? Yes, a benchmark would be great. My old dm.c is very primitiv. Its purpose is to show the difference between the performance of the backing_device and the performance of DRBD on top of the backing_device. --- And it measures a complete linear pattern -> It does not meassure the latency of the disks, it measures DRBD's overhead. -Philipp -- : Dipl-Ing Philipp Reisner Tel +43-1-8178292-50 : : LINBIT Information Technologies GmbH Fax +43-1-8178292-82 : : Schönbrunnerstr 244, 1120 Vienna, Austria http://www.linbit.com :