Message-ID: <49E750E5.7010106@vlnb.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 19:38:13 +0400
From: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@gmail.com>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Subject: Re: dm-multipath and write request ordering
References: <e2e108260904130422k2ac92e64jb5aff1cc2adc8da0@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e2e108260904130422k2ac92e64jb5aff1cc2adc8da0@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1381
Lines: 30


Bart Van Assche, on 04/13/2009 03:22 PM wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Several people are using the dm-multipath software as follows:
> * Linux server A is using dm-multipath to access data stored on
> servers B and C via two iSCSI sessions -- one session between servers
> A and B and one session between servers A and C.
> * On servers B and C iSCSI target software exports a block device that
> is replicated between servers B and C.
> 
> Round-robin load balancing will only work correctly in such a setup if
> the replication software knows the order in which write requests have
> been queued on the dm-multipath device. Since iSCSI uses the TCP/IP
> protocol, write requests generated by server A can arrive out-of-order
> on servers B and C. My questions are as follows:
> - Is it correct that round-robin load balancing can only work
> correctly in such a setup with proper support for write barriers in
> the device mapper ?

Not necessary. If replication between B and C done synchronously, 
barriers are not needed. Barriers are necessary only for async commands, 
when the next command sent before the previous one completed.

Vlad
--
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/