On 2017/12/4 23:11, Martin Wilck wrote: > On Mon, 2017-12-04 at 22:23 +0800, Guan Junxiong wrote: >>> An open question is what multipathd should do wrt path grouping if >>> it >>> only has preliminary prio values, in particular with group_by_prio. >> For the open question, in this situation, IMO it's reasonable to >> overwriting >> the preliminary prio values if we let the user/admin know : "this is >> an >> asynchronous priority checkers and it has high priority to the other >> synchronous >> prioritizer. > This is not what I meant. Once we have the final prio values, it's of > course the right thing to overwrite anything preliminary. > > The "open question" arises at the time when we only have the > preliminary values: We may group paths wrongly. Really bad example: we > might be putting active and passive paths of a storage system into the > same path group, causing endless trespassing... we should probably use > "failover" policy if "group_by_prio" is selected but no reliable > priorities are available. Thanks for your clarification. Agreed. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
