Re: [PATCH] make fc transport removal of target configurable

Steve Byan
2006-06-13T17:33:32Z

On Jun 13, 2006, at 11:42 AM, Michael Reed wrote:

> Treating fibre channel like removable storage is wrong. Fibre
> targets aren't
> generally supposed to go away. If they do, there's a significant
> chance
> that they'll be repaired and returned to service. It makes sense
> to keep
> the infrastructure in place just like scsi, sas, iscsi, ata.

In both Fibre Channel SANs and iSCSI SANs, administrators in large
datacenters will re-zone devices with some regularity as they
redeploy applications among existing systems.

> The kind of disruption the current code can cause to systems with
> multi-terabytes
> or petabytes of storage will be considered unacceptable in a
> production environment.

Agreed; but Fibre Channel and SAN devices _will_ come and go
dynamically.

> So, I also wish to encourage a reconsideration of the position that
> dead targets
> should be removed. Removing removable storage targets like
> firewire and usb
> makes sense. I just don't believe that the same applies to fibre
> channel
> or other generally non-removable targets.

Think of removing a Fibre Channel or iSCSI device as "removing access
authorization". You're correct that these devices are not often
physically removed from the SAN, but access authorization may change
frequently.

Regards,
-Steve
--
Steve Byan <smb@egenera.com>
Software Architect
Egenera, Inc.
165 Forest Street
Marlboro, MA 01752
(508) 858-3125