From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43465) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aVYk9-0004HY-8R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 01:04:14 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aVYk8-0001WD-Bt for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 01:04:13 -0500 Message-ID: <56C2BC13.7020906@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:05:07 +0800 From: Changlong Xie MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1451035376-7252-1-git-send-email-xiecl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <1451035376-7252-3-git-send-email-xiecl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <56A03A42.7060802@cn.fujitsu.com> <56A10E42.5040500@redhat.com> <20160122200209.GA18933@work-vm> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v9 2/3] quorum: implement bdrv_add_child() and bdrv_del_child() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alberto Garcia , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: Kevin Wolf , qemu block , Jiang Yunhong , Dong Eddie , qemu devel , Markus Armbruster , Gonglei , Stefan Hajnoczi , zhanghailiang On 02/09/2016 01:06 AM, Alberto Garcia wrote: > On Fri 22 Jan 2016 09:02:10 PM CET, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote: > >>>>>>> In general, what do you do to make sure that the data in a new >>>>>>> Quorum child is consistent with that of the rest of the array? >>>>>> >>>>>> Quorum can have more than one child when it starts. But we don't >>>>>> do the similar check. So I don't think we should do such check >>>>>> here. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, but when you start a VM you can verify in advance that all >>>>> members of the Quorum have the same data. If you do that on a >>>>> running VM how can you know if the new disk is consistent with the >>>>> others? >>>> >>>> User error if it is not. Just the same as it is user error if you >>>> request a shallow drive-mirror but the destination is not the same >>>> contents as the backing file. I don't think qemu has to protect us >>>> from user error in this case. >>> >>> But the backing file is read-only so the user can guarantee that the >>> destination has the same data before the shallow mirror. How do you >>> do that in this case? >> >> I think in the colo case they're relying on doing a block migrate to >> synchronise the remote disk prior to switching into colo mode. > > Yes but this is a general API that can be used independently from > COLO. I'd say if we want to allow that we should at least place a big > warning in the documentation. > Ok, that's fair enough. Will add in next version. Thanks -Xie > Berto > > > . >