It was an interesting case indeed, but I'm not sure about some of the details.
It seems he presented several different cases all merged into one. Mostly
two situations:
- take-over in case of failure (only one machine ever accesses the drive at
the same time). The only requirement here seems to be that hosts need
some way to make sure that the disk data is consistent, so it's pretty much
the same requirement as the single-host case.
- parallel access from two hosts. I'm not quite sure why you'd want to do
that. It seems to me that the only reason would be performance, but it
seems that the disk and/or the SCSI bus would be the limiting factor rather
than the host, so why have two hosts ?
What am I missing ?
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/