On Sat, Dec 03, 2022 at 01:02:41AM +0100, Martin Wilck wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:00 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote:
> > One of the Enterprise 7 variants, Claims "0.4.9" multipath but
> > appears to have a number of recent features backported, so some
> > frankensteined version.
> >
> > On Fri,
Enterprise 8 seems to have the new -T option, so clearly the old option had
limited use, and went away.
I had to read the updates to make sure I was not missing anything in my
understanding of that timeout.We override the vendors setting on a
number of arrays (we use 87400 seconds, long
On 12/3/22 01:02, Martin Wilck wrote:
Funny, Ben never told me there was a conflicting option name in RHEL.
I guess it's too late now, as I said, the upstream option has existed
for 4 years.
Because it was remove in RHEL-8, since multipath-tools were updated to 0.8.4
RHEL-7 uses a very old
On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:00 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote:
> One of the Enterprise 7 variants, Claims "0.4.9" multipath but
> appears to have a number of recent features backported, so some
> frankensteined version.
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:50 PM Martin Wilck wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at
One of the Enterprise 7 variants, Claims "0.4.9" multipath but appears to
have a number of recent features backported, so some frankensteined version.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:50 PM Martin Wilck wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:44 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote:
> > Thanks.
> >
> > The older
On 12/3/22 00:50, Martin Wilck wrote:
On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:44 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote:
Thanks.
The older distribution I checked has this for -T
-T tm:valid
check if tm matches the multipathd configuration
timestamp value from /run/multipathd/timestamp If so, return
On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:44 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> The older distribution I checked has this for -T
> -T tm:valid
> check if tm matches the multipathd configuration
> timestamp value from /run/multipathd/timestamp If so, return success
> if valid is 1.
Thanks.
The older distribution I checked has this for -T
-T tm:valid
check if tm matches the multipathd configuration timestamp
value from /run/multipathd/timestamp If so, return success if valid is 1.
Otherwise, return failure. If the timestamp doesn't match continue with
On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 14:48 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote:
> Reading through it, on the line below, shouldn't it be -t (not -T)?
>
No, -T is correct. -t prints the entire internal table, most of which
doesn't apply on any given system. -T prints only the settings for
hardware that's present in the
Reading through it, on the line below, shouldn't it be -t (not -T)?
Line:
+the multipath-tools built-in settings override the default. Run
\fImultipath -T\fR
On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 11:58 AM Martin Wilck wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:57 +0100, Martin Wilck wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at
On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:57 +0100, Martin Wilck wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:31 +0100, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> > On 12/1/22 11:32, mwi...@suse.com wrote:
> >
> > > From: Martin Wilck
> > >
> > > The statement that the default is 600 is wrong in most cases.
> > > Improve the description
On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:31 +0100, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> On 12/1/22 11:32, mwi...@suse.com wrote:
>
> > From: Martin Wilck
> >
> > The statement that the default is 600 is wrong in most cases.
> > Improve the description of the default and the dependency of this
> > parameter on other
On 12/1/22 11:32, mwi...@suse.com wrote:
From: Martin Wilck
The statement that the default is 600 is wrong in most cases.
Improve the description of the default and the dependency of this
parameter on other parameters.
I did change this patch to move "default value" to bottom.
--
dm-devel
From: Martin Wilck
The statement that the default is 600 is wrong in most cases.
Improve the description of the default and the dependency of this
parameter on other parameters.
Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck
Cc: Xose Vazquez Perez
---
multipath/multipath.conf.5 | 37
14 matches
Mail list logo