Misc DLM Improvements Regarding Socket Errors
Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]Versions newest first
- v1 Latest0 of 6 patches 0 repliesNew
Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet
None of the 6 patches the cover letter announces are in this archive.
Reviews trailers per patch
No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v1 yet.
Cover letter [Cluster-devel] [DLM PATCH 0/6] Misc DLM Improvements Regarding Socket Errors
Quoted 3 lines · Bob Peterson
The problem is: While testing the dlm in multiple recovery situations, Nate and I discovered multiple problems. Until recently, no one has tried to run recovery tests on an upstream DLM,
(Let's distinguish tcp connection testing/recovery vs locking testing/recovery. I agree we've never looked at the tcp connections too much since the node is typically dead anyway.)
Quoted 3 lines
I agree that some of these patches might be unnecessary improvements. I'll try to pare them down to what is absolutely necessary and what is not. I'll also document exactly why the necessary ones are needed.
Improvements are fine, I was just confused about which were fixes vs cleanups.
Quoted 8 lines
I'll also try to post them in order of highest priority and repost them as individual patches rather than a set.
The recovery tests are somewhat slow, so this will take some time.
BTW, Have you had a chance to look at the patch I posted on 18 January, titled "DLM: Replace
nodeid_to_addrwithkernel_getpeername"? That definitely fixes one bug in patchb3a5bbfdwhich you mentioned.
Great, thanks, that's the key one that I'd missed or forgotten.
Quoted 4 lines
I assume you're not suggesting I combine that patch with other patches to stabilize
b3a5bbfd, right? As you well know, this is very touchy code and it's easier to diagnose and debug a larger number of smaller patches.
No, I don't have any concerns with the other improvements/fixes you have since the main issue was fixed in that nodeid_to_addr replacement.