From: hare@suse.de (Hannes Reinecke)
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] Provide more fine grained control over multipathing
Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 09:18:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180529091855.27e6042b@pentland.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180529030236.GA28895@redhat.com>
On Mon, 28 May 2018 23:02:36 -0400
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 28 2018 at 9:19pm -0400,
> Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> > I understand and appreciate your position but I still don't think
> > the arguments for enabling DM multipath are sufficiently
> > compelling. The whole point of ANA is for things to be plug and
> > play without any admin intervention whatsoever.
> >
> > I also think we're getting ahead of ourselves a bit. The assumption
> > seems to be that NVMe ANA devices are going to be broken--or that
> > they will require the same amount of tweaking as SCSI devices--and
> > therefore DM multipath support is inevitable. However, I'm not sure
> > that will be the case.
> >
> > > Thing is you really don't get to dictate that to the industry.
> > > Sorry.
> >
> > We are in the fortunate position of being able to influence how the
> > spec is written. It's a great opportunity to fix the mistakes of
> > the past in SCSI. And to encourage the industry to ship products
> > that don't need the current level of manual configuration and
> > complex management.
> >
> > So I am in favor of Johannes' patches *if* we get to the point
> > where a Plan B is needed. But I am not entirely convinced that's
> > the case just yet. Let's see some more ANA devices first. And once
> > we do, we are also in a position where we can put some pressure on
> > the vendors to either amend the specification or fix their
> > implementations to work with ANA.
>
> ANA really isn't a motivating factor for whether or not to apply this
> patch. So no, I don't have any interest in waiting to apply it.
>
Correct. That patch is _not_ to work around any perceived incompability
on the OS side.
The patch is primarily to give _admins_ a choice.
Some installations like hosting providers etc are running quite complex
scenarios, most of which are highly automated.
So for those there is a real benefit to be able to use dm-multipathing
for NVMe; they are totally fine with having a performance impact if
they can avoid to rewrite their infrastructure.
Cheers,
Hannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-29 7:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-25 12:53 [PATCH 0/3] Provide more fine grained control over multipathing Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 12:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] nvme: provide a way to disable nvme mpath per subsystem Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 13:47 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 8:17 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-05-25 12:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] nvme multipath: added SUBSYS_ATTR_RW Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 12:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] nvme multipath: add dev_attr_mpath_personality Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 13:05 ` [PATCH 0/3] Provide more fine grained control over multipathing Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-25 13:58 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-25 14:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-25 14:50 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-29 1:19 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-05-29 3:02 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-29 7:18 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2018-05-29 7:22 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-29 8:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-29 9:54 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-29 23:27 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-30 19:05 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-30 19:59 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-04 6:19 ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-06-04 7:18 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-06-04 12:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-04 13:27 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 2:42 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-30 21:20 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-05-30 22:02 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 8:37 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-05-31 12:37 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-01 4:11 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 16:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-31 16:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-31 18:17 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-01 2:40 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-06-01 4:24 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-01 14:09 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-06-01 15:21 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-03 11:00 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-06-03 16:06 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-04 11:46 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-06-04 12:48 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-30 22:44 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 8:51 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-05-31 12:41 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-04 21:58 ` Roland Dreier
2018-06-05 4:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-05 22:57 ` Roland Dreier
2018-06-06 9:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-06 9:32 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-06-06 9:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-25 14:22 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 14:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20180529091855.27e6042b@pentland.suse.de \
--to=hare@suse.de \
/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).