On 18 feb 2010, at 13.55, Phil Harman wrote: ... > Whilst the latest bug fixes put the world to rights again with respect to > correctness, it may be that some of our performance workaround are still > unsafe (i.e. if my iSCSI client assumes all writes are synchronised to > nonvolatile storage, I'd better be pretty sure of the failure modes before I > work around that).
But are there any clients that assume that an iSCSI volume is synchronous? Isn't an iSCSI target supposed to behave like any other SCSI disk (pSCSI, SAS, FC, USB MSC, SSA, ATAPI, FW SBP...)? With that I mean: A disk which understands SCSI commands with an optional write cache that could be turned off, with cache sync command, and all those things. Put in another way, isn't is the OS/file systems responsibility to use the SCSI disk responsibly regardless of the underlying protocol? /ragge _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
