On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:07:23 -0500 "James R. Leu" <jleu@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > We are building a geographically redundant SAN that will allow > each LUN to be active on one node and passive on the other node > independent of the other LUNs. To accomplish this we we > need to be able to mark a LUN as offline and have it release the > reference to the underlying block device so we can make it passive. Why can't the passive target simply add a LUN instead of keeping it as offline? Then when the active target fails, the passive target can add the LUN? > DRBD is doing the block level replication and asserts the notion > of active/passive. It will not allow a block device to transition > to passive if anything is holding a reference to it. > > The iSCSI clients of the SAN are geographically redundant as well. > The resources on those clients need to be able to migrate between the > datacenters independent of each other. To accomplish this it is > highly desirable to keep the TGTD configuration nearly identical > on the nodes of the SAN so that the redundant iSCSI clients see > the same LUNs no matter if their local resources are active or passive. > > If my patch does not appear to be anything you want in the > main distribution could you at least look it over to see if I am > overlooking anything? I don't think that it's a good idea to close a LUN when making it offline. Making a LUN offline means that it reuses it later. There is no point to close (release) it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
