--- Anand Avati <avati@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Cool. In the case of mixed results (some success,
> > some failures), what is the result? Anyway to
> > distinguish this from a complete success?
>
> any one success is considered transactions success.
> fixing the failed operations is part of next open()
> (self-heal).
Will self healing prevent an inconsistent cluster from
happening? I.E. Two node cluster, A+B.
1) Node A goes down
2) Write occurs on Node B
3) Node B goes down (cluster is down)
4) Node A comes up -> cluster is inconsistent since B
is not yet available. Cluster should still be "down".
> Any plans for such a feature? HA is great, but so
> is error resilience/correction. :)
>
> we have thoughs of checksum based error
> detection/correction. Infact one of
> the users has submitted a n ECC based translator
> (yet to be reviewed seriously). But no plans of
> making it part of AFR.
So this ECC AFR would work on a single subvolume then?
> We are in fact even thinking of raid5 or raid6
> kind of translator which does checksum based error
> detection/recover to some extent.
Would this be a part of AFR, or a completely new
translator?
Thx again,
-Martin
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
