[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] 2.6.10-udm1
- From: christophe varoqui <christophe varoqui free fr>
- To: device-mapper development <dm-devel redhat com>
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] 2.6.10-udm1
- Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:17:25 +0100
On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 21:13 +0000, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 10:06:41PM +0100, christophe varoqui wrote:
> > Do still target 2.6.11 for inclusion ?
>
> I've not been getting as much feedback as I'd hoped for, so I'm not
> sure how much of the design is stable enough to submit yet.
>
I guess you won't get the feedback (and flames) before submission.
> For example, one outstanding question is:
>
> If there is a local path and a remote iscsi path to the
> same device, would those paths need different hw_handlers?
>
What people may want is raid1 across local and iscsi/nbd devices.
What you describe seems to be a (iSCSI) developper test case : The
userspace should avoid feeding a multipath map to the DM in this case.
> In other words, does the hw_handler concept need splitting up?
>
I don't think so : a LU is either
o presented by a single storage controler model : a single hw_handler
suffice
o directly attached : no hw_handler needed
I can't image a valid useful scenario where a LU can be presented
through different controler models or through different kernel
subsystems.
regards,
--
christophe varoqui <christophe varoqui free fr>
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]