----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lee Yarwood" <lyarw...@redhat.com>
> To: "Saggi Mizrahi" <smizr...@redhat.com>
> Cc: vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:53:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [vdsm] How should we handle aborted tasks? via engine, vdsClient 
> or both?
> 
> On 07/18/2012 03:13 PM, Saggi Mizrahi wrote:
> > We purposefully removed the ability to stop and aborted task from
> > outside VDSM.
> > It is one of the many features VDSM had (and still has) that could
> > corrupt you data center if abused.
> 
> Understood, however we also lack the ability to manually recover a
> task
> so is it just a case of waiting for VDSM to forcibly remove the
> aborted
> tasks itself?
Yes, Task recovery isn't really that robust. We are working on a different 
approach for tasks that is more cluster aware.
> 
> > On a related note, this is the time that the 1st rule of VDSM
> > didn't apply!
> > This is one hell of a milestone!
> 
> I would ask what the 1st rule of VDSM is but I fear I might wake up
> in a
> basement.
> 
> Lee
> --
> 
> Lee Yarwood
> Software Maintenance Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd
> 200 Fowler Avenue IQ Farnborough, Farnborough, Hants GU14 7JP
> 
> Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No.
> 03798903
> Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Brendan Lane (Ireland), Matt
> Parson(USA), Charlie Peters (USA)
> 
> GPG fingerprint : A5D1 9385 88CB 7E5F BE64  6618 BCA6 6E33 F672 2D76
> 
> 
> 
_______________________________________________
vdsm-devel mailing list
vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel

Reply via email to