Hi,
在 2024/10/24 16:57, John Garry 写道:
On 24/10/2024 03:10, Yu Kuai wrote:
On 23/10/2024 12:46, Geoff Back wrote:
Yes, raid1/raid10 write are the same. If you want to enable atomic
write
for raid1/raid10, you must add a new branch to handle badblocks now,
otherwise, as long as one copy contain any badblocks, atomic write
will
fail while theoretically I think it can work.
Can you please expand on what you mean by this last sentence, "I think
it can work".
I mean in this case, for the write IO, there is no need to split this IO
for the underlying disks that doesn't have BB, hence atomic write can
still work. Currently solution is to split the IO to the range that all
underlying disks doesn't have BB.
ok, right.
Indeed, IMO, chance of encountering a device with BBs and supporting
atomic writes is low, so no need to try to make it work (if it were
possible) - I think that we just report EIO.
If you want this, then make sure raid will set fail fast together with
atomic write. This way disk will just faulty with IO error instead of
marking with BB, hence make sure there are no BBs.
To be clear, you mean to set the r1/r10 bio failfast flag, right? There
are rdev and also r1/r10 bio failfast flags.
I mean the rdev flag, all underlying disks should set FailFast, so that
no BB will be present. rdev will just become faulty for the case IO
error.
r1/r10 bio failfast flags is for internal usage to handle IO error.
Thanks,
Kuai
Thanks,
John
.
