Thanks Clay! On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Clay Gerrard <clay.gerr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Shrinand Javadekar > <shrin...@maginatics.com> wrote: >> >> >> If it is less than N, the swift-drive-audit tool could potentially >> unmount an already recovered drive. >> >> If it is > N, it is possible to miss some messages in the log file. >> >> Is the above analysis correct? > > > You're probably not too far off, but maybe in practice the frequency and > depth off the lookback is still lower than the minimum amount of time a dc > tech can physically walk out to a server and swap out a failing disk that > gets unmounted? > > Once it's unmounted it stops generating errors, so maybe it's safer to pick > a frequency that's generally lower then the cycle time on a drive swap and > worst case you risk a replaced drive getting unmounted again for old errors > when the dc techs are super on the ball for some reason. At least an extra > unmount can be fixed remotely. > > -Clay
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
