Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2] locking: Add io_timeout to sanlock

2015-11-18 Thread Michal Privoznik
On 27.10.2015 17:53, Jiri Denemark wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 16:29:51 +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251190 >> >> So, if domain loses access to storage, sanlock tries to kill it >> after some timeout. So far, the default is 80 seconds. But for

[libvirt] [PATCH v2] locking: Add io_timeout to sanlock

2015-10-27 Thread Michal Privoznik
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251190 So, if domain loses access to storage, sanlock tries to kill it after some timeout. So far, the default is 80 seconds. But for some scenarios this might not be enough. We should allow users to adjust the timeout according to their needs.

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2] locking: Add io_timeout to sanlock

2015-10-27 Thread Jiri Denemark
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 16:29:51 +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251190 > > So, if domain loses access to storage, sanlock tries to kill it > after some timeout. So far, the default is 80 seconds. But for > some scenarios this might not be enough. We