On 08/01/2016 02:25 PM, Christophe Varoqui wrote:
Or we could honor arythmetic expressions like "5*alua+weightedpath",
giving users more control about preferences (and more opportunities to
step on their toes, sure).
Ugh. No.
You still would need to know which values the 'alua' (or any
prioritizer) will be returning.
ATM there is no guarantee nor even advise which values a prioritizer
should return. Which in itself is a good idea IMHO.
Another idea, less invasive if possible, but less versatile :
- Merge the alua prioritizer into the weightedpath prioritizer, given
the optimized/non-optimized and other ALUA states are available in the
path struct and have their snprint_path_* function and %wildcard.
Hmm. I still prefer the 'stacked prioritizer' approach, what with it
being far more flexible.
- Then weightedpath prio_args can be extended to support additive
priorities, like "alua <optimized state>:<... state> 10 serial foo 20"
Which again would require us to define the possible return values from
the alua (or any other handler).
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
