[dm-devel] 2.6.2-udm2
Kevin Corry
kevcorry at us.ibm.com
Wed Feb 18 12:01:25 UTC 2004
On Wednesday 18 February 2004 10:47, Joe Thornber wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 10:34:19AM -0600, Kevin Corry wrote:
> > Of course, suspending the device for that long a period is probably not
> > wise to begin with, depending on the activity on that device. Suspends
> > are generally meant to be very short. Pre-load the new device table,
> > suspend the device, switch in the new table, resume the device.
>
> It's not just about keeping the suspend period short, the preloading
> of a table is the bit that requires memory allocations.
Yes, but in the example Patrick mentioned, there wouldn't be any new table to
load (assuming when the cable is switched it doesn't suddenly show up as a
different device). It would simply be a suspend followed by a resume, with
the intention of preventing mpath from detecting I/O errors.
My point was that suspending a device for the length of time needed to
physically change a cable could lead to memory starvation.
In any case, I'm not a big fan of queueing I/Os or suspending the device when
all the paths in an mpath device fail. It just seems like it's going to cause
more problems than it's going to solve.
--
Kevin Corry
kevcorry at us.ibm.com
http://evms.sourceforge.net/
More information about the dm-devel
mailing list