[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [lvm-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] Handle transient secondary mirror leg failures

Takahiro Yasui [tyasui redhat com] wrote:
> On 12/18/09 12:10, Jonathan Brassow wrote:
> > 2) If you don't get a new table loaded, it will behave as a suspend/ 
> > resume only.  Recent code changes in dm-raid1.c are causing  
> > 'log_failure' and 'leg_failure' to not be reset in those cases.  IOW,  
> > all these steps could be for nothing.  :(
> I would like to know how effective the retry is. As Jon explained
> above, recent upstream kernel blocks all write I/Os on NOSYNC regions.
> This means that those write I/Os are kept blocked for a long time.
> For example, mirror retry interval in your patch #4 is 30 seconds and
> application or  filesystem will be waited for 30 seconds (330 seconds
> if retry count is 10). Can your application wait for more than 5 minutes?
> This behaviour will not been solved even if kernel is fixed so that
> log_failure and leg_failure are reset. The write I/Os blocked will
> be re-queued in the kernel when suspend/resume are done, but they
> will be put in the hold queue again if the device failure is not
> transient but permanent.
> I would like to know the use case of this patch set.

I have tested with RHEL5.4 kernel that doesn't block on device failure.
IMHO, suspend/resume is doing two things if the kernel code blocks on
failure -- 1) letting the kernel module unblock 2) start resync. We
should separate those two actions. Maybe, we should do something here???
Have an ioctl to start resync or have a message to unblock....

Also, blocking the kernel module introduced a regression -- the
mirror will block forever on a transient failure!

Thanks, Malahal.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]