On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 07:53:07PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 06:03:07PM +0100, Guido G?nther wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 05:14:54PM -0500, David Allan wrote: > > > This patch contains the implementation Daniel Berrange did of storage > > > pools using SCSI HBAs. I have updated it for the current tree in > > > preparation for implementing NPIV support. Let me know what you > > > think. > > This looks like a great addition but I wonder if it is of any real use > > without supporting multipath? On SANs issuing I/O to some paths might > > cause severe performance penalties or the LUN might be visible but I/O > > is rejected until an explicit switch over command is sent. This would be > > handled transparently if multipath would be used on top. > > This is *not* just for FibreChannel based HBAs. Even single host SATA Sure. > controllers show up as SCSI HBAs, so its perfectly usable even in that > case. So there's no need to block on multipath support It's just that using it on fibre based HBAs could cause trouble so thought I'd ask. -- Guido -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list