|To:||Dean Roehrich <roehrich@xxxxxxx>|
|Subject:||Re: DMAPI implementation about undeliverable event messages|
|From:||Aurelien Degremont - Stagiaire <degremont@xxxxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:51:26 +0100|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fr-FR; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113|
Dean Roehrich a écrit :
Well, let's back up. Why is your HSM application not present? Why did it destroy its sessions, but not unregister the events it had put on the filesystem?
Yes, I agree this error occurs only because of algorithm error. The HSM app should have unregistered the events before destroying its sessions.
(err... why notification could be persistent in we must always removed them ?)
I just wanted to say it will be "better" if DMAPI no not block in this particular case.
With all other events, it is still possible to recover when a event is raised with no application to catch it. A DM app is still abled to register and fetch it later, except for UNMOUNT event.
So, if the code could be fixed to work around this problem, ok, let's do it, else that's a pity.
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||[CHECKER] XFS doesn't respect mount -o sync (XFS, 2.6.11), Junfeng Yang|
|Next by Date:||Re: fc3 and stacks, Russell Cattelan|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: DMAPI implementation about undeliverable event messages, Dean Roehrich|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [xfs-masters] [patch 2/2] fs/xfs_super: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep_interruptible(), Nathan Scott|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|