Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753035AbZISWDA (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:03:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752968AbZISWC7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:02:59 -0400 Received: from gate.in-addr.de ([212.8.193.158]:47215 "EHLO mx.in-addr.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752936AbZISWC6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:02:58 -0400 Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 00:02:32 +0200 From: Lars Marowsky-Bree To: FUJITA Tomonori , jens.axboe@oracle.com Cc: neilb@suse.de, hch@infradead.org, James.Bottomley@suse.de, lars.ellenberg@linbit.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, bart.vanassche@gmail.com, davej@redhat.com, gregkh@suse.de, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, kyle@moffetthome.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, nab@linux-iscsi.org, knikanth@suse.de, philipp.reisner@linbit.com, sam@ravnborg.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] DRBD for 2.6.32 Message-ID: <20090919220232.GB31849@suse.de> References: <20090917161108.GA3361@infradead.org> <19122.65335.126937.476968@notabene.brown> <20090918200803.GM23126@kernel.dk> <20090919141334N.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20090919141334N.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> X-Ctuhulu: HASTUR User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1650 Lines: 44 On 2009-09-19T14:14:30, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > I guess that Christoph is worry about adding another user interface > for kinda device management; once we merge this, we can't fix it (for > the raid unification). Why can't it be fixed? Either a) there's going to be a transition period during which the "old" interface is supported but depreciated and scheduled to be removed (all driving the new unified same back-end), or b) there's going to be a new kernel which requires new user-space tools sharp. In either case, dm/md are affected by this, so a third interface doesn't really make much difference. The refactoring needs to happen in the back-end anyway, and that actually becomes easier when all concurrent implementations are present and can be reworked at the same time. > BTW, DM already has something like drbd? I thought that there is a > talk about that new target at LinuxCon. dm-replicator is nowhere near as usable as DRBD, and not upstream yet either. (Further, it's another independent implementation, pursued instead of unifying any of the existing ones or helping to merge drbd - don't get me started on my thoughts of that.) Regards, Lars -- Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc. SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG N?rnberg) "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde -- 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/