Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-06 Thread Vallo Kallaste

On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 07:44:56AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Some time ago Scott Long pointed out to me that ccd has less
  overhead than vinum 
 
 It does?

The actual tests showed a very little improvement in a few cases, so
I must admit that it made really no difference for bare striping. I
have no evidence (not being a programmer), but I believe that ccd
is lightweight compared to vinum, even considering only striping.
That, and the time of ccd being around compared to vinum, means
probably fewer bugs and better suitability for bare striping.
That's my personal opinion and I will rely also on other far more
knowledgeable person opinion in this particular case. To be fair I
believe that vinum striping and mirroring capabilities are fully
usable and proven also. I have personal experience which backs this,
not that it'll matter much to anybody else. Vinum R5 is broken and
I've lost interest over the years of trying to make use of it. No
complaints to you, I do understand that paid work is what makes
living.

  and is better suited for bare striping.
 
 It is?
 I'd be interested in details.

See above.
-- 

Vallo Kallaste
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-06 Thread Matthew Dillon

Yes, ccd is fairly light weight.  'man tuning' and 'man ccd' has
a lot of information on how to use it.  I generally recommend
using a stripe size of 1152 for multitasking loads.  Only use a
small/tiny stripe size if you need single-tasking sequential
performance (and even then you can take tune the stripe to the drive's
own caching capability).

The biggest mistake most people make when using striping is that
they use too small a stripe size which causes nearly every read() or
write() to have to be split across multiple drives, which multiplies
the overhead, or causes sequential reads of medium sized files to
constantly seek multiple drives, destroying the effectiveness of having
two seekable heads in the first place.

-Matt

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-05 Thread Bruce Evans

On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

 Worst case you will have the option to use:

   options NOGEOM
   options vinum

A NOGEOM option would be as acceptable as a NOFFS option for turning off
forcing of the one true file system down everyone's throats.

Bruce


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-05 Thread Vallo Kallaste

On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 12:45:59PM -0700, Lars Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Well, the showstopper is in vinum.  The fact that ccd(4) works
 seamlessly with GEOM is testament to this.
 
 For some reason I was under the (mis?)impression that ccd was no longer 
 being maintained... If it works with geom, we can probably move our 
 machines over to ccd. They're all no-frills stripes, so ccd 
 functionality is good enough.

Some time ago Scott Long pointed out to me that ccd has less
overhead than vinum and is better suited for bare striping. The
actual case involved two fake disks using asr(4) and 2400A. I had
no choice because hardware doesn't support spanning.
-- 

Vallo Kallaste
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-05 Thread Peter Wemm

Bruce Evans wrote:
 On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 
  Worst case you will have the option to use:
 
  options NOGEOM
  options vinum
 
 A NOGEOM option would be as acceptable as a NOFFS option for turning off
 forcing of the one true file system down everyone's throats.

Part of the problem there is a weakness in config that I've threatened
to fix on more than one occasion.  We do not have a way to have options
default to on and let people turn the option off.  Negative options
(options NOFOO) are a poor substitute.  In the past, a couple of things
were unifdefed that might have been better served as being 'default to on'
options or drivers.

This of course is ignoring the issue of geom vs the disklabel code.

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-05 Thread Bruce Evans

On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Peter Wemm wrote:

 Bruce Evans wrote:
  On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 
   Worst case you will have the option to use:
  
 options NOGEOM
 options vinum
 
  A NOGEOM option would be as acceptable as a NOFFS option for turning off
  forcing of the one true file system down everyone's throats.

 Part of the problem there is a weakness in config that I've threatened
 to fix on more than one occasion.  We do not have a way to have options
 default to on and let people turn the option off.  Negative options
 (options NOFOO) are a poor substitute.  In the past, a couple of things
 were unifdefed that might have been better served as being 'default to on'
 options or drivers.

Hmm.  Negative options implemented as negoptions FOO would work OK for
this.  Options could be defaulted to on by putting them in an included
config file, and then turned off using negoptions.

Bruce


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-05 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bruce Evans writes:
On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Peter Wemm wrote:

 Bruce Evans wrote:
  On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 
   Worst case you will have the option to use:
  
options NOGEOM
options vinum
 
  A NOGEOM option would be as acceptable as a NOFFS option for turning off
  forcing of the one true file system down everyone's throats.

 Part of the problem there is a weakness in config that I've threatened
 to fix on more than one occasion.  We do not have a way to have options
 default to on and let people turn the option off.  Negative options
 (options NOFOO) are a poor substitute.  In the past, a couple of things
 were unifdefed that might have been better served as being 'default to on'
 options or drivers.

Hmm.  Negative options implemented as negoptions FOO would work OK for
this.  Options could be defaulted to on by putting them in an included
config file, and then turned off using negoptions.

This could actually decrease the size and complexity of our
kernel config files considerably, just think of all the
theoretically-but-not-in-practice options like INET.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-05 Thread David O'Brien

On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 12:44:30PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
 No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
 responsibility to make older subsystems work.

So when is a KSE person going to fix the libc_r and releng4 binaries
problem??  That certainly is old functionality that is broken.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-05 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

On Saturday,  5 October 2002 at 15:55:05 +0300, Vallo Kallaste wrote:
 On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 12:45:59PM -0700, Lars Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Well, the showstopper is in vinum.  The fact that ccd(4) works
 seamlessly with GEOM is testament to this.

 For some reason I was under the (mis?)impression that ccd was no longer
 being maintained... If it works with geom, we can probably move our
 machines over to ccd. They're all no-frills stripes, so ccd
 functionality is good enough.

 Some time ago Scott Long pointed out to me that ccd has less
 overhead than vinum 

It does?

 and is better suited for bare striping.

It is?

I'd be interested in details.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-05 Thread Julian Elischer



On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, David O'Brien wrote:

 On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 12:44:30PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
  No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
  responsibility to make older subsystems work.
 
 So when is a KSE person going to fix the libc_r and releng4 binaries
 problem??  That certainly is old functionality that is broken.
 

Firstly, I'm not sure, as it's I can only take Dan's eworkd on it, 
but releng-4 binaries should be working again now.

Secondly The person who broke it (not me BTW) has been chastised
severely and has had a life-long learning experience.  He is working
hard on fixing it properly (But is not being helped by the fact hat his
job changed and he has to move towns). Dan, (Mr libc_r) is working in it
too, and AS THE MAIN MAINTAINER of libc_r he is not someone that I can
beat on when it comes to libc_r. If he says it's fixed I have to believe
him.






To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread n0go013

On 04.10-18:27, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 In message n0go013 writes :
 On 04.10-15:40, fergus wrote:
   On 04.10-14:20, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
   [...]
I suspect vinum uses this sysctl to get an inventory of disks in
the system, so can I get you to try again making sure you have
rev. 1.20 of src/sys/geom/geom_disk.c ?
  [...]
   i'll let you know the test results when i have some.
 
  same results -- can't initialise any drives.  i think the example below
  points more directly to the issue but i'm pretty sure it is because the
  direct read from the disk does not return a valid disklabel.  without a
  'vinum' partition entry vinum spews.
 
 I have no idea how vinum does this or something else, but clearly
 something is not done the right way in vinum...

apparently by allocating a bio header via 'geteblk' and calling the
DEV_STRATEGY macro.  not that it means anything to me but probably to
you it does (well i get the idea but . . .).

what is the correct way to read the disklabel ?  i'll hack around and
see if i can't clean up this and the other pieces of direct IO.

-- 
t
 t
 z

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], n0go013 writes
:
On 04.10-18:27, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 In message n0go013 writes :
 On 04.10-15:40, fergus wrote:
   On 04.10-14:20, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
   [...]
I suspect vinum uses this sysctl to get an inventory of disks in
the system, so can I get you to try again making sure you have
rev. 1.20 of src/sys/geom/geom_disk.c ?
  [...]
   i'll let you know the test results when i have some.
 
  same results -- can't initialise any drives.  i think the example below
  points more directly to the issue but i'm pretty sure it is because the
  direct read from the disk does not return a valid disklabel.  without a
  'vinum' partition entry vinum spews.
 
 I have no idea how vinum does this or something else, but clearly
 something is not done the right way in vinum...

apparently by allocating a bio header via 'geteblk' and calling the
DEV_STRATEGY macro.  not that it means anything to me but probably to
you it does (well i get the idea but . . .).

what is the correct way to read the disklabel ?  i'll hack around and
see if i can't clean up this and the other pieces of direct IO.

I would need to look at the code to be able to tell, I don't have
time for that.


-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Lars Eggert

Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 
 I would need to look at the code to be able to tell, I don't have
 time for that.

I'd consider not having vinum work under geom a show-stopper... at least 
until geom can stripe.

Lars
-- 
Lars Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED]   USC Information Sciences Institute



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lars Eggert writes:
This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.

--ms040706010906030302070807
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 
 I would need to look at the code to be able to tell, I don't have
 time for that.

I'd consider not having vinum work under geom a show-stopper... at least 
until geom can stripe.

Well, the showstopper is in vinum.  The fact that ccd(4) works
seamlessly with GEOM is testament to this.

There are numerous architectural issues which have never been
fixed in vinum, and one or more of these bits now.

Whoever loves vinum will have to chase it/them down and fix it.

If I receive patches or requests for changes to GEOM as result
of this, they will be evaluated in good faith.

Worst case you will have the option to use:

options NOGEOM
options vinum

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Lars Eggert

Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lars Eggert writes:

I'd consider not having vinum work under geom a show-stopper... at least 
until geom can stripe.
 
 
 Well, the showstopper is in vinum.  The fact that ccd(4) works
 seamlessly with GEOM is testament to this.

For some reason I was under the (mis?)impression that ccd was no longer 
being maintained... If it works with geom, we can probably move our 
machines over to ccd. They're all no-frills stripes, so ccd 
functionality is good enough.

Thanks for clearing that up!

Lars
-- 
Lars Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED]   USC Information Sciences Institute



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Julian Elischer



On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lars Eggert writes:
 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
 
 --ms040706010906030302070807
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 
 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
  
  I would need to look at the code to be able to tell, I don't have
  time for that.
 
 I'd consider not having vinum work under geom a show-stopper... at least 
 until geom can stripe.
 
 Well, the showstopper is in vinum.  The fact that ccd(4) works
 seamlessly with GEOM is testament to this.
 
 There are numerous architectural issues which have never been
 fixed in vinum, and one or more of these bits now.
 
 Whoever loves vinum will have to chase it/them down and fix it.

No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
responsibility to make older subsystems work.



 
 If I receive patches or requests for changes to GEOM as result
 of this, they will be evaluated in good faith.
 
 Worst case you will have the option to use:
 
   options NOGEOM
   options vinum
 
 -- 
 Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
 FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
 Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
 
 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread John Baldwin


On 04-Oct-2002 Julian Elischer wrote:
 
 
 On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 
 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lars Eggert writes:
 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
 
 --ms040706010906030302070807
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 
 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
  
  I would need to look at the code to be able to tell, I don't have
  time for that.
 
 I'd consider not having vinum work under geom a show-stopper... at least 
 until geom can stripe.
 
 Well, the showstopper is in vinum.  The fact that ccd(4) works
 seamlessly with GEOM is testament to this.
 
 There are numerous architectural issues which have never been
 fixed in vinum, and one or more of these bits now.
 
 Whoever loves vinum will have to chase it/them down and fix it.
 
 No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
 responsibility to make older subsystems work.

Oh, you mean like KSE on Alpha?

-- 

John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
Power Users Use the Power to Serve!  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
lian Elischer writes:

No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
responsibility to make older subsystems work.

I'm _so_ glad to hear _you_ say that:

When will you have made KSE work on sparc64 and ia64 ?

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Daniel Holmes

Lars Eggert wrote:

 For some reason I was under the (mis?)impression that ccd was no longer 
 being maintained... If it works with geom, we can probably move our 
 machines over to ccd. They're all no-frills stripes, so ccd 
 functionality is good enough.

From the man page of ccd:

  ccd has an option for a parity disk, but does not currently implement it.

and

  In an event of a disk failure, you can use dd(1) to recover the failed
  disk.

As I understand vinum  ccd (please correct me if I am wrong), this will
keep ccd from ever achieving the performance and ease of use of vinum.
I use vinum for a simple mirror, and found it easier to configure than
ccd.  Keeping it from running in 5.0 would probably kill a lot of setups.

Thanks,
Dan
--
Daniel D Holmes, N7NKR  I'net:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Standard disclaimers apply wherever you can find a sticky spot.
I'm betting that I'm just abnormal enough to survive. -- The Tick

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Daniel Holmes write
s:

As I understand vinum  ccd (please correct me if I am wrong), this will
keep ccd from ever achieving the performance and ease of use of vinum.

I don't think anybody advocated ccd as a wholesale replacement for
vinum.  That being said, I have lost more data on vinum RAID5
volumes than on striped ccd parititions, and not becaue of hardware
failures.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Julian Elischer



On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, John Baldwin wrote:

 
 On 04-Oct-2002 Julian Elischer wrote:
  
  
  On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
  
  In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lars Eggert writes:
  This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
  
  --ms040706010906030302070807
  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
  
  Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
   
   I would need to look at the code to be able to tell, I don't have
   time for that.
  
  I'd consider not having vinum work under geom a show-stopper... at least 
  until geom can stripe.
  
  Well, the showstopper is in vinum.  The fact that ccd(4) works
  seamlessly with GEOM is testament to this.
  
  There are numerous architectural issues which have never been
  fixed in vinum, and one or more of these bits now.
  
  Whoever loves vinum will have to chase it/them down and fix it.
  
  No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
  responsibility to make older subsystems work.
 
 Oh, you mean like KSE on Alpha?

What existing functionality on the alpha does KSE stop?


 
 -- 
 
 John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
 Power Users Use the Power to Serve!  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Daniel Eischen

On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
 lian Elischer writes:
 
 No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
 responsibility to make older subsystems work.
 
 I'm _so_ glad to hear _you_ say that:
 
 When will you have made KSE work on sparc64 and ia64 ?

Those are Tier2 platforms :-)

-- 
Dan Eischen


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread John Baldwin


On 04-Oct-2002 Julian Elischer wrote:
 
 
 On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, John Baldwin wrote:
 
 
 On 04-Oct-2002 Julian Elischer wrote:
  
  
  On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
  
  In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lars Eggert writes:
  This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
  
  --ms040706010906030302070807
  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
  
  Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
   
   I would need to look at the code to be able to tell, I don't have
   time for that.
  
  I'd consider not having vinum work under geom a show-stopper... at least 
  until geom can stripe.
  
  Well, the showstopper is in vinum.  The fact that ccd(4) works
  seamlessly with GEOM is testament to this.
  
  There are numerous architectural issues which have never been
  fixed in vinum, and one or more of these bits now.
  
  Whoever loves vinum will have to chase it/them down and fix it.
  
  No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
  responsibility to make older subsystems work.
 
 Oh, you mean like KSE on Alpha?
 
 What existing functionality on the alpha does KSE stop?

So you agree that requiring vinum users to turn off GEOM is ok?  Part
of adding a new feature is providing proof of concept that it works
for more than just one tiny case.  Also, if you actually have to make
it work on multiple cases, then you have to learn enough about other
cases to better enable you to make better-informed design decisions
that take other cases into account.  One KSE works on i386, what are
multithreaded ports like, oh, X, supposed to do when compiling with
-lpthread doesn't work?

-- 

John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
Power Users Use the Power to Serve!  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Julian Elischer



On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
 lian Elischer writes:
 
 No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
 responsibility to make older subsystems work.
 
 I'm _so_ glad to hear _you_ say that:
 
 When will you have made KSE work on sparc64 and ia64 ?

When it works on i386.  In case you  haven't noticed, KSE
is not a legacy facility.

love you too.
XXX

 
 -- 
 Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
 FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
 Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Daniel E
ischen writes:
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
 lian Elischer writes:
 
 No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
 responsibility to make older subsystems work.
 
 I'm _so_ glad to hear _you_ say that:
 
 When will you have made KSE work on sparc64 and ia64 ?

Those are Tier2 platforms :-)

And ?  Vinum is a tier2 feature.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Julian Elischer



On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, John Baldwin wrote:

 
  
  Oh, you mean like KSE on Alpha?
  
  What existing functionality on the alpha does KSE stop?
 
 So you agree that requiring vinum users to turn off GEOM is ok?  Part
 of adding a new feature is providing proof of concept that it works
 for more than just one tiny case.  Also, if you actually have to make
 it work on multiple cases, then you have to learn enough about other
 cases to better enable you to make better-informed design decisions
 that take other cases into account.  One KSE works on i386, what are
 multithreaded ports like, oh, X, supposed to do when compiling with
 -lpthread doesn't work?

I'm not making KSE the default. The discussion is about default
settings.

The ports of KSE to other architectures will be rather minor
but it's pointless to do it until the MI parts settle down.


It's not worth more discussion than this. If we ned to turn off GEOM
to run vinum then ok, it's not a major problem. I think it's the GEOM
author's job to make it work, but if core doesn't tjink he needs to
bother, that's just a reflection on FreeBSD, not me.




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Terry Lambert

Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
 lian Elischer writes:
 No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
 responsibility to make older subsystems work.
 
 I'm _so_ glad to hear _you_ say that:
 
 When will you have made KSE work on sparc64 and ia64 ?

What does KSE break, which used to work on these platforms?

It's not like CAM (to pick an older example that has less emotion
bound up in it), where every SCSI driver that hadn't already been
CAM-ified at the time of the import, broke.  When KSE doesn't work,
you lose only new features, not old ones, right?

Isn't complaining about this on sparc64/ia64/alpha kind of like
complaining about someone adding 4M page support to i386, but not
adding the same thing to other platforms?


-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Daniel Eischen

On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Daniel E
 ischen writes:
 On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
 
  In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
  lian Elischer writes:
  
  No, it is established principal tha the importer of new features has the
  responsibility to make older subsystems work.
  
  I'm _so_ glad to hear _you_ say that:
  
  When will you have made KSE work on sparc64 and ia64 ?
 
 Those are Tier2 platforms :-)
 
 And ?  Vinum is a tier2 feature.

I make no judgement about vinum.  Just the comment about
KSE working on sparc64 and ia64.

-- 
Dan Eischen


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: [ GEOM tests ] vinum drives lost

2002-10-04 Thread Garance A Drosihn

At 9:02 PM +0200 10/4/02, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
There are numerous architectural issues which have never been
fixed in vinum, and one or more of these bits now.

Whoever loves vinum will have to chase it/them down and fix it.

If I receive patches or requests for changes to GEOM as result
of this, they will be evaluated in good faith.

Worst case you will have the option to use:

   options NOGEOM
   options vinum

I know nothing about vinum and only a little about GEOM, so I have
no opinion on which should be fixed to work with the other, and
I'm reluctant to get drawn into that battle anyway.

However, I do think that if it isn't easy to get the two of them to
work together nicely, then we should enforce the above options in
the source code.  Ie, if someone tries to compile a kernel with
both GEOM and vinum turned on, then the compile should fail with
some suitable error message.

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn=   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer   or  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message