Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 21:10:12 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: mav@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Switchover to CAM ATA? Message-ID: <20100426191012.GA1711@garage.freebsd.pl> In-Reply-To: <20100426.121946.506212773266921087.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <4BD06BD9.6030401@FreeBSD.org> <20100426.103327.319083499807534535.imp@bsdimp.com> <20100426181209.GB3012@garage.freebsd.pl> <20100426.121946.506212773266921087.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:19:46PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20100426181209.GB3012@garage.freebsd.pl> > Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> writes: > : On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:33:27AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > : > I've read most of this thread. I think this is cool technology. > : > However, before we move forward with this, we need to have a plan for > : > the various issues that have come up. The plan needs to be specific, > : > have owners for key items, warnings about ownerless == obsoleted, and > : > target dates. > : > > : > I think this is one of the cases where we should record the plan of > : > record on a wiki. It worked well for other times we've had big, > : > disruptive changes. > : > > : > My opinion for the path forward: > : > (1) Send a big heads up about the future of ataraid(5). It will be > : > shot in the head soon, to be replaced be a bunch of geom classes > : > for each different container format. At least that seems to be > : > the rough consensus I've seen so far. We need worker bees to do > : > many of these classes, although much can be mined from the ataraid > : > code today. > : > : This shouldn't be a bunch of GEOM classes. This should one class which > : recognize multiple formats, just like the LABEL class. > : I don't think it is feasible to reuse gmirror for that, it wasn't > : designed in something like this in mind. > > OK. Maybe I got the consensus wrong... My key point is that we need > a plan moving forward, we need to identify what's actively being > worked on vs "somebody else[tm] should do tihs" and when it needs to > be done "or else". You most likely got it right, I'm just saying creating separate GEOM class for each metadata format is wrong direction. :) > : > (5) Issues with glabel and ataraid(5) need an owner, and need to be > : > resolved, since the device names here are likely to change. > : > : What are the issues? > > ataraid doesn't remove the underlying ad* devices, so glabel often > picks those up instead of the ataraid device, and you only get 1 > disk's worth of raid device... So no mirroring or only 1/2 a striped > volume. It not only leave ad* devices, it doesn't even open them properly using GEOM. It's internal ATA hack, which is PITA. -- Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheelsystems.com pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkvV5RQACgkQForvXbEpPzTregCg0NfgcdQonjy4PBIFQ+7EQJsU Md8An1JWmyXVZuTwnO0xAqqVUrjXKDqo =K6k2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100426191012.GA1711>