From: Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@suse.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Multi-path IO in 2.5/2.6 ?
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:04:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020910130427.GP2992@marowsky-bree.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10209100055.ZM65139@classic.engr.sgi.com>
On 2002-09-10T00:55:58,
Jeremy Higdon <jeremy@classic.engr.sgi.com> said:
> Is there any plan to do something for hardware RAIDs in which two different
> RAID controllers can get to the same logical unit, but you pay a performance
> penalty when you access the lun via both controllers?
This is implemented in the md multipath patch in 2.4; it distinguishes between
"active" and "spare" paths.
The LVM1 patch also does this by having priorities for each path and only
going to the next priority group if all paths in the current one have failed,
which IMHO is slightly over the top but there is always someone who might need
it ;-)
This functionality is a generic requirement IMHO.
Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>
--
Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me.
--- Gregory F. Pfister
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-10 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-09 14:57 [RFC] Multi-path IO in 2.5/2.6 ? James Bottomley
2002-09-09 16:56 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-09-09 17:34 ` James Bottomley
2002-09-09 18:40 ` Mike Anderson
2002-09-10 13:02 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-09-10 16:03 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-09-10 16:27 ` Mike Anderson
2002-09-10 0:08 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-09-10 7:55 ` Jeremy Higdon
2002-09-10 13:04 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree [this message]
2002-09-10 16:20 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-09-10 13:16 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-09-10 19:26 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-09-11 14:20 ` James Bottomley
2002-09-11 19:17 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-09-11 19:37 ` James Bottomley
2002-09-11 19:52 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-09-12 1:15 ` Bernd Eckenfels
2002-09-11 21:38 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-09-11 20:30 ` Doug Ledford
2002-09-11 21:17 ` Mike Anderson
2002-09-10 17:21 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-09-10 18:42 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-09-10 19:00 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-09-10 19:37 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-09-11 0:21 ` Neil Brown
[not found] <patmans@us.ibm.com>
2002-10-30 16:58 ` [PATCH] 2.5 current bk fix setting scsi queue depths Patrick Mansfield
2002-10-30 17:17 ` James Bottomley
2002-10-30 18:05 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-10-31 0:44 ` James Bottomley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-09-10 16:34 [RFC] Multi-path IO in 2.5/2.6 ? Cameron, Steve
2002-09-10 18:48 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-10 14:43 Cameron, Steve
2002-09-10 15:05 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-10 14:06 Cameron, Steve
2002-09-10 14:25 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-09 17:58 Ulrich Weigand
2002-09-09 10:49 Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-09-09 12:23 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-10 10:30 ` Heinz J . Mauelshagen
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=20020910130427.GP2992@marowsky-bree.de \
--to=lmb@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@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