Arnon, On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 10:55 +0300, Arnon Yaari wrote: > Based on the manufacturer documentation: > https://support.infinidat.com/hc/en-us/articles/202319222 > > INFINIDAT recommends round-robin path selector using > a different path per IO. Timeout and path recovery values > are adjusted for error-free hot upgrade scenarios. > > Signed-off-by: Arnon Yaari <arnony@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > + .fast_io_fail = 15, > + .dev_loss = 15, I apologize for coming back to this after more than a year. I've been wondering about your dev_loss recommendation. What is the rationale for setting dev_loss and fast_io_fail to the same value, which is straight against the general recommendation? And what is the reason for the aggressively low dev_loss value anyway? Device loss and re-discovery is much more complex to handle for both the kernel and multipathd than failure/reinstantiation. You are the only vendor who recommends setting dev_loss less than the default of 600s. Could you share your reasoning please? Regards, Martin -- Dr. Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx>, Tel. +49 (0)911 74053 2107 SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
