On 07/01/2009 10:12 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
Ric Wheeler wrote:
One way to test this with reasonable, commodity hardware would be
something like the following:
(1) Get an automated power kill setup to control your server
etc. Good plan.
Another way to test the entire software stack, but not the physical
disks, is to run the entire test using VMs, and simulate hard disk
write caching and simulated power failure in the VM. KVM would be a
great candidate for that, as it runs VMs as ordinary processes and the
disk I/O emulation is quite easy to modify.
Certainly, that could be useful to test some level of the stack. Historically,
the biggest issues that I have run across have been focused on the volatile
write cache on the storage targets. Not only can it lose data that has been
acked all the back to the host, it can also potentially reorder that data in
challenging ways that will make file system recovery difficult....
As most issues probably are software issues (kernel, filesystems, apps
not calling fsync, or assuming barrierless O_DIRECT/O_DSYNC are
sufficient, network fileserver protocols, etc.), it's surely worth a look.
It could be much faster than the physical version too, in other words
more complete testing of the software stack given available resources.
With the ability to "fork" a running VM's state by snapshotting it and
continuing, it would even be possible to simulate power failure cache
loss scenarios at many points in the middle of a stress test, with the
stress test continuing to run - no full reboot needed at every point.
That way, maybe deliberate trace points could be placed in the
software stack at places where power failure cache loss seems likely
to cause a problem.
-- Jamie
I do agree that this testing would also be very useful, especially so since you
can do this almost in any environment.
Regards,
Ric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
