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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).