On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 10:38:06PM +0100, christophe varoqui wrote: > I confirm the current event notification scheme is useable for the > pathchecker. I have a prototype I'll post this week. Excellent. > Speaking of that I call for comment on the saneness of the following > general rule : what about the multipath configuration tool isolating > failed paths in a fallback PG ? They would be marked Active as no IO > went through them, and thus be exercised in case high priority paths all > fail. If they are hot-activated by the controler (think a controler LUN > handling switchover), they will work as-is. If they are really failed, > they will just be marked as such. I think you'll need a set of fallback PGs corresponding to the original PGs. I think it's a good idea, definitely worth trying. It'll reduce the chances of io failing when there really is a valid path. - Joe
