From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Snitzer Subject: Re: [LSF/MM ATTEND]: Hot spare module ? And Btrfs volume management without mount Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 11:33:24 -0500 Message-ID: <20150128163324.GA11823@redhat.com> References: <54B8C174.4020802@oracle.com> <20150127101845.GB13522@quack.suse.cz> <54C8BDB2.1020700@oracle.com> Reply-To: device-mapper development Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54C8BDB2.1020700@oracle.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com To: Anand Jain Cc: Chris Mason , dm-devel@redhat.com, lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, Jan Kara List-Id: dm-devel.ids On Wed, Jan 28 2015 at 5:45am -0500, Anand Jain wrote: > > > Thanks for the reply. > > now based on your advise, if my participation is confirmed, by march, > I would come up with a concrete proposal or an experimental code > to share results at the conference if needed. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the proposal but.. This seems like such a niche issue I think it isn't ever going to get traction. Having a common pool of hot spares doesn't buy you much if all the different volume managers were to experience a failure -- in that case the sharing actively works against you (if you've only accomodated for say 1 of the 3 different volume managers failing at any one time; but if you have provisioned for worst case of all solutions failing then what was the point of the exercise?).