Miles Nordin <car...@ivy.net> writes: > There will probably be clients that might seem to implicitly make this > assuption by mishandling the case where an iSCSI target goes away and > then comes back (but comes back less whatever writes were in its write > cache). Handling that case for NFS was complicated, and I bet such > complexity is just missing without any equivalent from the iSCSI spec, > but I could be wrong. I'd love to be educated. > > Even if there is some magical thing in iSCSI to handle it, the magic > will be rarely used and often wrong until peopel learn how to test it, > which they haven't yet they way they have with NFS.
I decided I needed to read up on this and found RFC 3783 which is very readable, highly recommended: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3783 basically iSCSI just defines a reliable channel for SCSI. the SCSI layer handles the replaying of operations after a reboot or connection failure. as far as I understand it, anyway. -- Kjetil T. Homme Redpill Linpro AS - Changing the game _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
