(Illustration by Gaich Muramatsu)
Hello, I am a bit confused about the management of volume replicas. Sorry to admit, I have not read the source to get the definite answer, but it would be a rather time-consuming exercise. Hope somebody has the answer at hand :) Right now it is not supported (?) to modify a volume storage group or to move volumes between the groups. Volume groups historically have had strong connection to IP muticast groups, while multicasting is not used nowadays, I think. I wonder if volume storage groups might/should be eliminated from the administrators view, making it more straightforward to place and move volumes across servers? I feel that VSG do group data that is not necessarily logically bound to each other and is easier to maintain on per volume basis, not per vsg. I'd rather see a (<name>,<server>) volume identifiers, with create/remove operations applicable [just?] to such pairs. It would make volume management more straightforward than it is now. Some operations like rename should still operate just on <name>, probably. Would it be a major rewrite to do it so? Is the volume storage groups database really necessary, even internally? Am I asking wrong questions? I am just looking for a suitable way to manage volumes and replication. It is a nightmare for some sysadms I know, at least while managing DFS... Coda may be easier to understand - but might be made even better. Best regards, -- IvanReceived on 2002-10-06 07:36:35