Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 10:41:47 +1000 (EST) From: Carl Makin <carl@xena.aipo.gov.au> To: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> Cc: mjacob@feral.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Pathing to SCSI/FC devices. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003311036100.7326-100000@newton.aipo.gov.au> In-Reply-To: <v04220800b50782638fa2@[195.238.20.81]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Brad Knowles wrote: > At 4:28 PM -0800 2000/3/28, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > Yes, we very much has considered this. What's your issue about this, per se? > Myself, I just need to be able to tell the system that SCSI ID x > LUN y is actually the same logical device as SCSI ID v LUN w, but > that one is preferred and the other is backup, and have FreeBSD deal > with doing the re-targeting in the CAM SCSI driver. heh, the buzzword for this is "Dynamic Failover". :) In management circles where the current focus is on 24x7, this is seen as a distinct advantage. > The end result should be that nothing above the CAM SCSI driver > should know that a switch has occurred -- especially not programs > Same deal with fibrechannel as SCSI. > Does that about sum it up? Yes. That was pretty much what I was thinking. "Dual Pathing" the buzzword for using both paths to the device would also be desirable, but then you get into things like wanting to optimise data paths depending on how busy each path is. > Oh, and Carl -- I don't suppose you're looking at Hitachi DF400 > (sometimes rebadged as Comparex D1400) units, are you? If so, I'd No, sorry. I can't actually say what box we're buying yet since we haven't signed the contract. :( Carl. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0003311036100.7326-100000>