Bob's comments on persistent reservation

George Penokie penokie at ibm.net
Wed Jul 9 06:58:12 PDT 1997


* From the T10 (formerly SCSI) Reflector (t10 at symbios.com), posted by:
* George Penokie <penokie at ibm.net>
*
Bob,	

Your suggested wording changes for your problems 2 and 3 look OK to me
but not so for problem 1.

I have a different interpetation for the the statement from SPC you have
a problem with:
"(with a Reserve service action that does not conflict with established
persistent reservations or tasks)"

I aggree it is worded poorly but I think changing the wording as follows
would clear it up and capture the actual intent:
"(with a Reserve service action that does not conflict with established
persistent reservations or tasks relating to established persistent
resetvations)"

I also have problems with the changes to the notes. Adding the first
sentence to the existing wording is OK. But the remaining sentences
force all persistent reservation out commands to be ordered (your
wording seems to have come right out of the queuing model definition of
ordered queue tags) reguardless of the actual tag (if any) that is
received with the command. I do not think it is a good idea to create
commands that override the queue tags. 
Bye for now,
George Penokie
*
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at symbios.com




More information about the T10 mailing list