Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 11:53:34 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: joao.barros@gmail.com Cc: Massimo <massimo@cedoc.mo.it>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: raid framework from OpenBSD Message-ID: <432B069E.8000104@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <70e8236f050916092979979613@mail.gmail.com> References: <1126683752.4306.6.camel@massimo.datacode.it> <4327DC81.7040903@samsco.org> <70e8236f050916092979979613@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joao Barros wrote: > On 9/14/05, Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> 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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?432B069E.8000104>