On 05/16/2018 06:35 PM, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
On 05/16/2018 04:47 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 15/05/2018 23:25, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
This is the current status of this investigation. I decided to start a
discussion here, see if someone can point me something that I
overl
On 05/16/2018 06:47 AM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
* Daniel Henrique Barboza (danie...@linux.ibm.com) wrote:
Hi,
I've been working in the last two months in a miscompare issue that happens
when using a raid device and a SATA as scsi-hd (emulated SCSI) with
cache=none and io=threads during
On 05/16/2018 04:47 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 15/05/2018 23:25, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
This is the current status of this investigation. I decided to start a
discussion here, see if someone can point me something that I overlooked
or got it wrong, before I started changing the POSIX
* Daniel Henrique Barboza (danie...@linux.ibm.com) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been working in the last two months in a miscompare issue that happens
> when using a raid device and a SATA as scsi-hd (emulated SCSI) with
> cache=none and io=threads during a hardware stress test. I'll summarize it
> here
On 15/05/2018 23:25, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> This is the current status of this investigation. I decided to start a
> discussion here, see if someone can point me something that I overlooked
> or got it wrong, before I started changing the POSIX thread pool
> behavior to see if I can enfor
Hi,
I've been working in the last two months in a miscompare issue that
happens when using a raid device and a SATA as scsi-hd (emulated SCSI)
with cache=none and io=threads during a hardware stress test. I'll
summarize it here as best as I can without creating a great wall of text
- Red Hat
