On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 09:12:23PM +0100, Martin Wilck wrote: > Hi Brian, > > This is what we are doing now in our recommended configuration. I > > will > > probably add a patch for our hw table entry soon. It is a bit strange > > to > > me still that detect_prio would mean replace the one that I am > > explicitly > > stating in the device section. To me detect_prio would be if I didn’t > > provide one and wanted multipath to choose for me. > > True. The design of the "detect_prio" option is awkward and confusing. > It happens all the time that people set "prio" and wonder why the > setting isn't applied. Or worse, they think it is applied but it's not. > I think the original idea was to use ALUA whenever supported, even if > historically the hwtable contained something else for a given storage. > It has been this way for a long time, I don't think we can change the > semantics easily. > It's so that you can select the failback prioritizer if multipath can't autodetect one. This made more sense when detect_prio defaulted to "no", so autodetection was only used by devices that specifically enabled it. Now it just is what it is. -Ben
