* multipath - stable ?
@ 2003-12-12 4:52 Franc Carter
2003-12-12 17:35 ` Steven Dake
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Franc Carter @ 2003-12-12 4:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux-raid maillist
Hi,
I've been using linux sofwtare raid for years and had no problems.
We are about to install some disk systems that have dual contollers
and am wondering wether multipath is as stable as the rest of software
raid ?
thanks
--
Franc Carter Ph:61-2-8374-5071 Fax: 61-2-8374-5070
Systems Manager, SIRCA Ltd http://www.sirca.org.au/
DISCLAIMER: The contents of this email, inclusive of attachments, may
be legally privileged and confidential. Any unauthorised use of the
contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received this message in
error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the email
message along with any attachment(s). Unintended recipients of this
email are prohibited from retaining, disclosing, distributing or using
any information contained herein. This email is also subject to
copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted
without the written consent of the copyright owner.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: multipath - stable ?
2003-12-12 4:52 Franc Carter
@ 2003-12-12 17:35 ` Steven Dake
2003-12-12 23:35 ` Franc Carter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Steven Dake @ 2003-12-12 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Franc Carter; +Cc: Linux-raid maillist
The multipath code is simple and seems pretty stable to me.
There is one issue, in that failover can sometimes take a long time
because of the SCSI layer's insistence upon executing error recovery.
In the case of multipath I/O's, there is no need to error recover before
processing the I/O. Instead, once error is detected, failover, then
start error recovery.
The SCSI layer doesn't do this currently, so failover times are high.
Thanks
-steve
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 21:52, Franc Carter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been using linux sofwtare raid for years and had no problems.
> We are about to install some disk systems that have dual contollers
> and am wondering wether multipath is as stable as the rest of software
> raid ?
>
> thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: multipath - stable ?
2003-12-12 17:35 ` Steven Dake
@ 2003-12-12 23:35 ` Franc Carter
2003-12-15 22:00 ` Steven Dake
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Franc Carter @ 2003-12-12 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sdake; +Cc: Linux-raid maillist
Thanks,
can you give me a ballpark on 'high' >5 minutes ?
cheers
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 04:35 am, Steven Dake wrote:
> The multipath code is simple and seems pretty stable to me.
>
> There is one issue, in that failover can sometimes take a long time
> because of the SCSI layer's insistence upon executing error recovery.
> In the case of multipath I/O's, there is no need to error recover before
> processing the I/O. Instead, once error is detected, failover, then
> start error recovery.
>
> The SCSI layer doesn't do this currently, so failover times are high.
>
> Thanks
> -steve
>
>
> On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 21:52, Franc Carter wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been using linux sofwtare raid for years and had no problems.
> > We are about to install some disk systems that have dual contollers
> > and am wondering wether multipath is as stable as the rest of software
> > raid ?
> >
> > thanks
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
--
Franc Carter Ph:61-2-8374-5071 Fax: 61-2-8374-5070
Systems Manager, SIRCA Ltd http://www.sirca.org.au/
DISCLAIMER: The contents of this email, inclusive of attachments, may
be legally privileged and confidential. Any unauthorised use of the
contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received this message in
error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the email
message along with any attachment(s). Unintended recipients of this
email are prohibited from retaining, disclosing, distributing or using
any information contained herein. This email is also subject to
copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted
without the written consent of the copyright owner.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: multipath - stable ?
@ 2003-12-13 1:56 Doug Griswold
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Doug Griswold @ 2003-12-13 1:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sdake, franc; +Cc: linux-raid
Ours takes about thirty seconds with qlogic and emulex cards.
>>> Franc Carter <franc@tech.sirca.org.au> 12/12/03 18:36 PM >>>
Thanks,
can you give me a ballpark on 'high' >5 minutes ?
cheers
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 04:35 am, Steven Dake wrote:
> The multipath code is simple and seems pretty stable to me.
>
> There is one issue, in that failover can sometimes take a long time
> because of the SCSI layer's insistence upon executing error recovery.
> In the case of multipath I/O's, there is no need to error recover
before
> processing the I/O. Instead, once error is detected, failover, then
> start error recovery.
>
> The SCSI layer doesn't do this currently, so failover times are high.
>
> Thanks
> -steve
>
>
> On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 21:52, Franc Carter wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been using linux sofwtare raid for years and had no problems.
> > We are about to install some disk systems that have dual contollers
> > and am wondering wether multipath is as stable as the rest of
software
> > raid ?
> >
> > thanks
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid"
in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
--
Franc Carter Ph:61-2-8374-5071 Fax: 61-2-8374-5070
Systems Manager, SIRCA Ltd http://www.sirca.org.au/
DISCLAIMER: The contents of this email, inclusive of attachments, may
be legally privileged and confidential. Any unauthorised use of the
contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received this message in
error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the email
message along with any attachment(s). Unintended recipients of this
email are prohibited from retaining, disclosing, distributing or using
any information contained herein. This email is also subject to
copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted
without the written consent of the copyright owner.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: multipath - stable ?
2003-12-12 23:35 ` Franc Carter
@ 2003-12-15 22:00 ` Steven Dake
2003-12-15 22:13 ` Franc Carter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Steven Dake @ 2003-12-15 22:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Franc Carter; +Cc: Linux-raid maillist
The SCSI layer should retries a failed I/O 5 times, and have 30 second
timeouts per I/O. The card itself my return the I/O as failed before
the 30 second timeout, which would improve your failover times. That
gives 3 minutes as a maximum.
Thanks
-steve
On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 16:35, Franc Carter wrote:
> Thanks,
>
> can you give me a ballpark on 'high' >5 minutes ?
>
> cheers
>
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 04:35 am, Steven Dake wrote:
> > The multipath code is simple and seems pretty stable to me.
> >
> > There is one issue, in that failover can sometimes take a long time
> > because of the SCSI layer's insistence upon executing error recovery.
> > In the case of multipath I/O's, there is no need to error recover before
> > processing the I/O. Instead, once error is detected, failover, then
> > start error recovery.
> >
> > The SCSI layer doesn't do this currently, so failover times are high.
> >
> > Thanks
> > -steve
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 21:52, Franc Carter wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've been using linux sofwtare raid for years and had no problems.
> > > We are about to install some disk systems that have dual contollers
> > > and am wondering wether multipath is as stable as the rest of software
> > > raid ?
> > >
> > > thanks
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: multipath - stable ?
2003-12-15 22:00 ` Steven Dake
@ 2003-12-15 22:13 ` Franc Carter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Franc Carter @ 2003-12-15 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sdake; +Cc: Linux-raid maillist
Thanks, for us 3 minutes is fine
regards
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 09:00 am, Steven Dake wrote:
> The SCSI layer should retries a failed I/O 5 times, and have 30 second
> timeouts per I/O. The card itself my return the I/O as failed before
> the 30 second timeout, which would improve your failover times. That
> gives 3 minutes as a maximum.
>
> Thanks
> -steve
>
> On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 16:35, Franc Carter wrote:
> > Thanks,
> >
> > can you give me a ballpark on 'high' >5 minutes ?
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 04:35 am, Steven Dake wrote:
> > > The multipath code is simple and seems pretty stable to me.
> > >
> > > There is one issue, in that failover can sometimes take a long time
> > > because of the SCSI layer's insistence upon executing error recovery.
> > > In the case of multipath I/O's, there is no need to error recover before
> > > processing the I/O. Instead, once error is detected, failover, then
> > > start error recovery.
> > >
> > > The SCSI layer doesn't do this currently, so failover times are high.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > -steve
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 21:52, Franc Carter wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I've been using linux sofwtare raid for years and had no problems.
> > > > We are about to install some disk systems that have dual contollers
> > > > and am wondering wether multipath is as stable as the rest of software
> > > > raid ?
> > > >
> > > > thanks
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > >
> > >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
--
Franc Carter Ph:61-2-8374-5071 Fax: 61-2-8374-5070
Systems Manager, SIRCA Ltd http://www.sirca.org.au/
DISCLAIMER: The contents of this email, inclusive of attachments, may
be legally privileged and confidential. Any unauthorised use of the
contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received this message in
error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the email
message along with any attachment(s). Unintended recipients of this
email are prohibited from retaining, disclosing, distributing or using
any information contained herein. This email is also subject to
copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted
without the written consent of the copyright owner.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-12-15 22:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-12-13 1:56 multipath - stable ? Doug Griswold
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-12 4:52 Franc Carter
2003-12-12 17:35 ` Steven Dake
2003-12-12 23:35 ` Franc Carter
2003-12-15 22:00 ` Steven Dake
2003-12-15 22:13 ` Franc Carter
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).