From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Thu Sep 21 14:50:07 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89B5CE09059 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:50:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk) Received: from smtp.krpservers.com (smtp.krpservers.com [62.13.128.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.krpservers.com", Issuer "RapidSSL SHA256 CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30CCF811C3 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:50:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk) Received: from [10.12.30.106] (host86-162-208-244.range86-162.btcentralplus.com [86.162.208.244]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.krpservers.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v8LEo3i0018197 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 21 Sep 2017 15:50:04 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 15:49:57 +0100 From: Karl Pielorz To: "Rodney W. Grimes" cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Storage 'failover' largely kills FreeBSD 10.x under XenServer? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <201709211423.v8LENKvN094067@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <201709211423.v8LENKvN094067@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:50:07 -0000 --On 21 September 2017 07:23 -0700 "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: >> So they don't. I presumed they were cam, as they're presented as 'ada0'. > > Ok, need to sort that out for certain to get much further. > > What are you running for Dom0? XenServer 7.1 - i.e. the official ISO distribution from www.xenserver.org > Did you do the sysctl's in Dom0 or in the guest? In the guest. I don't have access to the equivalent (or, rather shouldn't have access to the equivalent in Dom0 as it's the official installation - i.e. black boxed). > To be effective I would think they would need to be run > in the guest, but if DOM0 is timing out and returning > an I/O error then they well have to be adjusted there first. dom0 (i.e. XenServer grumbles about paths going down, shows some I/O errors - that get re-tried, but doesn't invalidate the storage). As soon as the paths are available again - you can see it re-attach to them. > Are these timeouts coming from Dom0 or from a VM in a DomU? domU - as above, dom0 grumbles, but generally seems OK about things. dom0 doesn't do anything silly like invalidate the VM's disks or anything. > Windows has horrible long timeouts and large retry counts, and worse > they dont warn the user that it is having issues other than event logs > and things usually go to the state of drive catastrophic failure before > the user ever sees an error. I can believe that - I've seen the figure of 60 seconds bandied around (as opposed to 30 seconds for Linux / FreeBSD). Sadly, making FreeBSD have a similar timeout (at least just to test) may fix the issue. -Karl