On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 08:46:34PM +0200, christophe varoqui wrote: > On lun, 2005-06-20 at 14:05 -0400, goggin, edward wrote: > > Two things with path group failback seem flawed right now. > > > > (1) Looks like it might be possible for a currently disabled path group > > which is not the highest priority path group to remain disabled even > > when paths in the group test successfully. This seems to be possible > > because the code in switch_pathgroup() called by checkerloop() in > > multipathd only fails back to the highest priority path group. Granted > > that the problem is primarily (__only__) cosmetic since the other group(s) > > are not being actively used anyway, but it is still misleading to a viewer > > of > > "multipath -l" to see disabled path groups which should not be in this > > state. > > > Yes, this one is on the todo. > You already raised that point speaking of "kernel/userspace asymmetry" > if I remember. > Done. Regards, cvaroqui
