From: Max TenEyck Woodbury <mtew@cds.duke.edu>
To: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric.Ayers@intec-telecom-systems.com,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>,
"Roets, Chris" <Chris.Roets@compaq.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux Cluster using shared scsi
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 13:39:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3AF04648.73F5BFCE@cds.duke.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200105011445.KAA01117@localhost.localdomain> <3AEEDFFC.409D8271@redhat.com> <15086.60620.745722.345084@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <3AF025AE.511064F3@redhat.com>
Doug Ledford wrote:
>
> ...
>
> If told to hold a reservation, then resend your reservation request once every
> 2 seconds (this actually has very minimal CPU/BUS usage and isn't as big a
> deal as requesting a reservation every 2 seconds might sound). The first time
> the reservation is refused, consider the reservation stolen by another machine
> and exit (or optionally, reboot).
Umm. Reboot? What do you think this is? Windoze?
Really, You can NOT do clustering well if you don't have a consistent locking
mechanism. The use of a hardware locking method like 'reservation' may be a
good way to avoid race conditions, but it should be backed up by the
appropriate exchange of messages to make sure everybody has the same view of
the system. For example, you might use it like this:
1. Examine the lock list for conflicts. If a conflict is found, the lock
request fails.
2. Reserve the device with the lock on it. If the reservation fails, delay
a short amount of time and return to 1.
3. Update the lock list for the device.
4. When the list update is complete, release the reservation.
In other words, the reservation acts as a spin-lock to make sure updates
occur atomically.
mtew@cds.duke.edu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-05-02 17:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-05-01 13:07 Linux Cluster using shared scsi Roets, Chris
2001-05-01 14:45 ` James Bottomley
2001-05-01 16:10 ` Doug Ledford
2001-05-01 17:05 ` Eric Z. Ayers
2001-05-01 20:38 ` Alan Cox
2001-05-01 20:52 ` James Bottomley
2001-05-01 21:07 ` Eric Z. Ayers
2001-05-01 21:24 ` Alan Cox
2001-05-02 15:20 ` Doug Ledford
2001-05-02 16:37 ` Eddie Williams
2001-05-02 17:20 ` Mike Anderson
2001-05-02 17:50 ` Doug Ledford
2001-05-02 18:55 ` Mike Anderson
2001-05-02 20:31 ` Doug Ledford
2001-05-03 12:53 ` James Bottomley
2001-05-03 13:52 ` James Bottomley
2001-05-02 17:39 ` Max TenEyck Woodbury [this message]
2001-05-02 17:47 ` Doug Ledford
2001-05-02 21:03 ` Pavel Machek
2001-05-03 19:57 ` Eric Z. Ayers
2001-05-03 22:32 ` Jonathan Lundell
2001-05-02 21:47 ` Max TenEyck Woodbury
2001-05-02 23:16 ` Doug Ledford
2001-05-04 14:52 ` Eddie Williams
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-04-27 15:11 James Bottomley
2001-04-27 13:18 Roets, Chris
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=3AF04648.73F5BFCE@cds.duke.edu \
--to=mtew@cds.duke.edu \
--cc=Chris.Roets@compaq.com \
--cc=Eric.Ayers@intec-telecom-systems.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=dledford@redhat.com \
--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