On 5/1/06, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 01 May 2006 00:26:05 CDT, Circuitsoft Development said:
> about 600 microseconds, topped at 3msec over 10 minutes) I figure that
> 5msec timeout won't add any noticeable lag to the volume manager, as
> most disk seek times are in that range.
Note that if you're setting 5ms as your timeout for detecting a *crash*,
and your *ping* takes 3ms, that leaves you a whole whopping 2ms. If you
have 1ms scheduler latency at *each* end (remember - you're in userspace
Volume/Lock manager in Kernelspace - Don't feel like dealing with
user-mode block devices
I was actually planning on a 5msec timeout to ignore that computer,
for now, then if I don't get a response within 100msec, ping them,
and permenantly remove them from the list of peers and broadcast a
"this peer is dead" message to the network if the ping times out at
500msec.
at both ends, right?) you have approximately 0ms left for the remote end to
actually *do* anything, and for the local end to process the reply.
And if the remote end has to issue a syscall during processing the request,
you're basically screwed.
The code on the remote end is checking a list of locks to see if a
block is in it.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]