Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 06:44:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 06:44:14 -0400 Received: from gate.in-addr.de ([212.8.193.158]:36103 "HELO mx.in-addr.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 06:44:13 -0400 Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 12:49:44 +0200 From: Lars Marowsky-Bree To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [RFC] Multi-path IO in 2.5/2.6 ? Message-ID: <20020909104944.GH27887@marowsky-bree.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Ctuhulu: HASTUR Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1207 Lines: 34 Morning everyone, I hope people are waking up by now ;-) So, what is the take on "multi-path IO" (in particular, storage) in 2.5/2.6? Right now, we have md multipathing in 2.4 (+ an enhancement to that one by Jens Axboe and myself, which however was ignored on l-k ;-), an enhancement to LVM1 and various hardware-specific and thus obviously wrong approaches. I am looking at what to do for 2.5. I have considered porting the small changes from 2.4 to md 2.5. The LVM1 changes are probably and out gone, as LVM1 doesn't work still. I noticed that EVMS duplicates the entire md layer internally (great way to code, really!), so that might also require changing if I update the md code. Or can the LVM2 device-mapper be used to do that more cleanly? I wonder whether anyone has given this some thought already. Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Br?e -- Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me. --- Gregory F. Pfister - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/