xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash
From: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:03:22 +0100
In-reply-to: <20090204122625.GM24173@disturbed>
Organization: it-management http://it-management.at
References: <498376CF.8020806@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200902041127.46714@xxxxxx> <20090204122625.GM24173@disturbed>
User-agent: KMail/1.10.3 (Linux/2.6.27.13-ZMI; KDE/4.1.3; x86_64; ; )
On Mittwoch 04 Februar 2009 Dave Chinner wrote:
> > What just comes to my mind: what about XEN/VMware?
> >
> > What settings should be used within a virtual machine? Even if I
> > have battery backed cache and nobarrier on the host, the VM itself
> > could crash, or the whole host freeze. Is "nobarrier" save within a
> > VM?
>
> Depends on the implementation of the hypervisor.

OK, so we don't know? 
I guess VMware will be the most used for Linux systems, and XEN usage 
will soon grow a lot as it's directly in the kernel now. Does anybody 
know for those two, whether "nobarrier" is save/needed/a bad thing?

mfg zmi
-- 
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc    -----      http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31                      .network.your.ideas.
// PGP Key:         "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38  500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4
// Keyserver: wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net                  Key-ID: 1C1209B4

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>