3 XCOPY problems

Ralph O. Weber ralphoweber at csi.com
Wed May 19 06:41:44 PDT 1999


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at symbios.com), posted by:
* "Ralph O. Weber" <ralphoweber at csi.com>
*
Joseph,

I will track your problems and (at a minimum) ensure their
discussion at the July SCSI Working Group meeting.  If you
get a group agreement before then, please send a note to me.

Looking at the cat problem, I'm wondering if it is necessary
to state that the data is contributed to the beginning of
the write data (emphasis in beginning and write) in the
next segment.  Also, I've been wondering if we are clear
about the case where a cat segment is followed by a
write filemark segment (or any other segment descriptor
that doesn't give the copy manager a place to put the
cat data).

With regard to the pad problem.  The idea of discarding
read data bothered me, but I assumed everybody had already
thought about it and was comfortable with it.  One thought
that comes to mind is adding a counter in the REPORT COPY
RESULTS / COPY STATUS data.  The counter would be of the
number of bytes discarded due to pad considerations.  Also,
feel free to specify additional uses of the UNEXPECTED INEXACT 
SEGMENT ASC/ASCQ if you need.  Or, change the text to, say,
INEXACT SEGMENT PROCESSING ERROR to make the ASC/ASCQ more
broadly useful.  Or, if necessary, more ASC/ASCQ values 
can be defined.

Based on the thinking I've applied elsewhere in the proposal,
I'd prefer that the information field contain the number of
bytes written.  But, I'm open to the other choice.

Thanks.

Ralph...




*
* 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