From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 16 17:53:37 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C36A316A420 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:53:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5F643D45 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:53:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8GHrUhp007943; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 11:53:30 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <432B069E.8000104@samsco.org> Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 11:53:34 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050615 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: joao.barros@gmail.com References: <1126683752.4306.6.camel@massimo.datacode.it> <4327DC81.7040903@samsco.org> <70e8236f050916092979979613@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <70e8236f050916092979979613@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: Massimo , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: raid framework from OpenBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:53:38 -0000 Joao Barros wrote: > On 9/14/05, Scott Long wrote: > >>Massimo wrote: >> >>>I would like to know what do you think about new OpenBSD raid framework >>>management. >>>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc&m=112630095818062 >>> >>>Doesn't it seems good stuff which is good for consideration? >>> >>>Regards. >> >>Creating a unified management tool for multiple RAID architectures has >>been a Holy Grail for at least 10 years, if not longer. It's >>deceptively hard, though. While it sounds straight-forward and is >>relatively easy to do for 1 or 2 architectures, the vast differences in >>how different architectures work makes it quickly turn into a huge mess. >>This is especially true when it comes to topology discovery and >>management and asynchronous event notification. Often times the only >>course is to degrade to a very simple, lowest common denominator >>interface, which then starts to limit the usefulness of the tool. I've >>been involved in several professional projects in exactly this area, and >>it simply is very, very hard to do well. The OpenBSD work looks >>interesting, but unless they can demostrate useful operation on more >>than 1 or 2 architectures, it's not terribly impressive. That's not to >>say that it can't be done and be a success, but the amount of required >>effort should not be underestimated. It's relatively easy to come up >>with a framework and implement one architecture module in it, then tell >>everyone else to simply add more modules. >> >>Also, it's not clear from the email whether the tool has to be manually >>told to rescan and look for changes in the state of the array (not just >>SES/SAFTE changes of the component drives). Displaying status on demand >>is fine, but what admin sits in front of their terminal and refreshes >>their monitoring apps every 5 seconds? The key is to have a an event >>notification pipeline that can collect events in near real time, filter >>them in a configurable way, and send out email/pager alerts when >>appropriate. Also, what does this mean for a datacenter full of >>machines that need to be monitored? Does a remote terminal session need >>to be opened on each one in order for monitoring to work? >> >>But, even if this particular work degrades into only being a tool for >>AMI (I assume they mean MegaRAID) controllers, it's still useful and I >>give them credit for doing it. > > > Having an amr I'm most interested in this, as I guess more people are. > Given that there is "customer" interest, my question is: is there > interest from you in this, having it imported to FreeBSD? > I've looked at the code and I wouldn't mind starting to work on this. > > -- > Joao Barros Give it a try if you're interested. Scott