Hi,
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 12:00 -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 11:46:26AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 04:36:30PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 10:46 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
> > > > This new method of managing r
Hi,
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 11:46 -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 04:36:30PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 10:46 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
> > > This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
> > > the previous approach of using the us
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 11:46:26AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 04:36:30PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 10:46 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
> > > This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
> > > the previous approach of using the
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 04:36:30PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 10:46 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
> > This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
> > the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
> >
> > - use dlm slot numbers to assign journal
Hi,
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 10:46 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
> This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
> the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
>
> - use dlm slot numbers to assign journal id's
> - use dlm recovery callbacks to initiate journal recovery
> - us
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 04:58:22PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > + clear_bit(SDF_NOJOURNALID, &sdp->sd_flags);
> > + smp_mb__after_clear_bit();
> > + wake_up_bit(&sdp->sd_flags, SDF_NOJOURNALID);
> > + ls->ls_first = !!test_bit(DFL_FIRST_MOUNT, &ls->ls_recover_flags);
> > + return 0
Hi,
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 10:46 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
[snip]
>
> +static int gdlm_mount(struct gfs2_sbd *sdp, const char *table)
> +{
> + struct lm_lockstruct *ls = &sdp->sd_lockstruct;
> + char cluster[GFS2_LOCKNAME_LEN];
> + const char *fsname;
> + uint32_t flags;
> +
This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
- use dlm slot numbers to assign journal id's
- use dlm recovery callbacks to initiate journal recovery
- use a dlm lock to determine the first node to mount fs
- use a dlm lock to t
- Original Message -
| This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
| the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
|
| - use dlm slot numbers to assign journal id's
| - use dlm recovery callbacks to initiate journal recovery
| - use a dlm lock to determine the fir
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 03:40:09PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> I think it would be a good plan to not send this last patch for the
> current merge window and let it settle for a bit longer. Running things
> so fine with the timing makes me nervous bearing in mind the number of
> changes,
To
Hi,
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 10:21 -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:08:15AM -0500, Bob Peterson wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > | This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
> > | the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
> > |
> > |
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:08:15AM -0500, Bob Peterson wrote:
> - Original Message -
> | This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
> | the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
> |
> | - use dlm slot numbers to assign journal id's
> | - use dlm recovery call
- Original Message -
| This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
| the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
|
| - use dlm slot numbers to assign journal id's
| - use dlm recovery callbacks to initiate journal recovery
| - use a dlm lock to determine the fir
Hi,
On Thu, 2011-12-22 at 16:23 -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:47:38PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 01:07:38PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > > > struct lm_lockstruct {
> > > > int ls_jid;
> > > > unsigned int ls_first;
>
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:47:38PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 01:07:38PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > > struct lm_lockstruct {
> > > int ls_jid;
> > > unsigned int ls_first;
> > > - unsigned int ls_first_done;
> > > unsigned int ls_nodir;
> > Since ls_flags
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:45:21AM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> I don't think I understand whats going on in that case. What I thought
> should be happening was this:
>
> - Try to get mounter lock in EX
>- If successful, then we are the first mounter so recover all
> journals
>-
Hi,
On Tue, 2011-12-20 at 16:04 -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:16:43PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:39:08AM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > > > I dislike arbitrary delays also, so I'm hesitant to add them.
> > > > The choices here are:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:16:43PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:39:08AM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > > I dislike arbitrary delays also, so I'm hesitant to add them.
> > > The choices here are:
> > > - removing NOQUEUE from the requests below, but with NOQUEUE you
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:39:08AM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > I dislike arbitrary delays also, so I'm hesitant to add them.
> > The choices here are:
> > - removing NOQUEUE from the requests below, but with NOQUEUE you have a
> > much better chance of killing a mount command, which is a
Hi,
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 12:47 -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 01:07:38PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > > struct lm_lockstruct {
> > > int ls_jid;
> > > unsigned int ls_first;
> > > - unsigned int ls_first_done;
> > > unsigned int ls_nodir;
> > Since ls_flags a
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 01:07:38PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > struct lm_lockstruct {
> > int ls_jid;
> > unsigned int ls_first;
> > - unsigned int ls_first_done;
> > unsigned int ls_nodir;
> Since ls_flags and ls_first also also only boolean flags, they could
> potentially b
Hi,
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 16:03 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
> This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
> the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
>
> - use dlm slot numbers to assign journal id's
> - use dlm recovery callbacks to initiate journal recovery
> - us
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 16:03 -0600, David Teigland wrote:
> This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
> the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
>
> - use dlm slot numbers to assign journal id's
> - use dlm recovery callbacks to initiate journal recovery
> - use a d
This new method of managing recovery is an alternative to
the previous approach of using the userland gfs_controld.
- use dlm slot numbers to assign journal id's
- use dlm recovery callbacks to initiate journal recovery
- use a dlm lock to determine the first node to mount fs
- use a dlm lock to t
24 matches
Mail list logo
