jim owens wrote:
Ric Wheeler wrote:
jim owens wrote:
And by "different users" these customers almost always mean
different operating systems. They are combining storage into
a central location for easier management.
When you have one specific LUN exported from an array, it is owned by
one OS. You can definitely have different LUN's used by different
OS's, but that seems to be irrelevant to our challenges here, right?
But the total thin storage pool is shared by multiple luns
and thus maybe multiple not-able-to-cooperate hosts.
agreed...
I was only pointing this out because earlier threads seemed
to be "linux filesystems to be exact across multiple hosts"
(which is really a cluster design) and even if we did that
for linux it would not solve the customer need.
I just wanted to make it clear why trying to do a complicated
change to linux for exactness is pointless because the customer
requirement is for more than linux attached to the thin pool.
So the relevance is our design boundary.
jim
I think that the concern is that the exact implementation is actually
already coded and relatively easy for us to do (i.e., send down unmap
commands at natural file system level units after a truncate/delete).
The irony is that the hard part is to try to approach that level of
exactness with the other techniques (coalescing unmaps, defrag, etc) :-)
ric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
