Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 24 Jan 2004 03:06:23 +0100 (CET)
From:      Lukas Ertl <l.ertl@univie.ac.at>
To:        "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Updated geom_vinum
Message-ID:  <20040124024925.O1021@korben.in.tern>
In-Reply-To: <20040124013406.GB20359@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References:  <20040122171029.N1850@korben.in.tern> <20040124013406.GB20359@wantadilla.lemis.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:

> This is a great understatement.  This code is some of the most complex
> I have ever written.  I'm not saying that you can't do better, but it
> seems a waste of time to reinvent the wheel.  Take a look at
> vinumraid5.c and vinumrequest.c for an example of how complicated it
> can be.

It's true, I've oversimplified a whole lot.  As I said, there's still a
real lot left to do.  For example, there's now no handling of crashed,
stopped, or faulty objects.  I thought I should try to get the code
running when all objects are responding and then add the necessary bits
for fail safety later.  That might not be the most clever way to do it,
but as I said in my first mail, I wanted a proof-of-concept, and yet, it
works.

> The other thing that strikes me is that you've greatly simplified the
> object structures (originally in vinumobj.h, now in g_vinum_var.h).
> While a lot of things go away as the result of GEOM, others don't,
> like the I/O stats and revive parameters for example.  It's possible
> that you're planning to put them back in, but this seems like a lot
> more work than necessary.

Yes, I've left out a lot that I currently didn't need, as to not confuse
myself while working on it.  I'm sure that many of that stuff is going to
go back in.

> Also, I'm not sure that changing tables to lists is the best way to
> go: each request will have to go down multiple levels of list to find
> the appropriate object.  I'm prepared to be proven wrong on this one,
> however: certainly enlarging tables has been one of the biggest
> problems in the current Vinum implementation.

I have no real preference for lists over tables or something else.  It
just happens that the list code is already very present in GEOM, so I
thought I could take it.  If tables do better, I've nothing against it.

Thanks very much for looking at the code and for your feedback.

regards,
le

-- 
Lukas Ertl                             eMail: l.ertl@univie.ac.at
UNIX Systemadministrator               Tel.:  (+43 1) 4277-14073
Vienna University Computer Center      Fax.:  (+43 1) 4277-9140
University of Vienna                   http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~le/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040124024925.O1021>