On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 15:16 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > I wasn't belittling them. I was trying to isolate the likely culprit in > the situations. You seem to want the md stack to time things out. As > has already been commented by several people, myself included, that's a > band-aid and not a fix in the right place. The linux kernel community > in general is pretty hard lined when it comes to fixing the bug in the > wrong way. It did sound as if I was complaining about nothing and that I shouldn't bother the linux-raid people and instead just continuously update the kernel and stop raising issues. If I misunderstood you I'm sorry, but somehow I still think that belittling my problems was implied in your responses. > Not in the older kernel versions you were running, no. These "old versions" (specially the RHEL) are supposed to be the official versions supported by Redhat and the hardware vendors, as they were very specific as to what versions of Linux were supported. Of all people, I would think you would appreciate that. Sorry if I sound frustrated and upset, but it is clearly a result of what "supported and tested" really means in this case. I don't want to go into a discussion of commercial distros, which are "supported" as this is nor the time nor the place but I don't want to open the door to the excuse of "its an old kernel", it wasn't when it got installed. > And I guarantee not a single one of those systems even knows what SATA > is. They all use tried and true SCSI/FC technology. Sure, the tru64 units I talked about don't use SATA (although some did use PATA) I'll concede to that point. > In any case, if Neil is so inclined to do so, he can add timeout code > into the md stack, it's not my decision to make. The timeout was nothing more than a suggestion based on what I consider a reasonable expectation of usability. Neil said no and I respect that. If I didn'tm I could always write my own as per the open source model :-) But I am not inclined to do so. Outside of the rejected suggestion, I just want to figure out when software raid works and when it doesn't. With SATA, my experience is that it doesn't. So far I've only received one response stating success (they were using the 3ware and Areca product lines). Anyway, this thread just posed the question, and as Neil pointed out, it isn't feasible/worth to implement timeouts within the md code. I think most of the points/discussions raised beyond that original question really belong to the thread "Software RAID when it works and when it doesn't" I do appreciate all comments and suggestions and I hope to keep them coming. I would hope however to hear more about success stories with specific hardware details. It would be helpfull to have a list of tested configurations that are known to work. Alberto - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
