[Drbd-dev] Re: [john.cagle@hp.com: FW: device number request for drbd]

[Lars Ellenberg]

/ 2004-07-28 17:33:14 +0200
\ Lars Marowsky-Bree:
> On 2004-07-28T16:55:18,
>    Philipp Reisner <philipp.reisner@linbit.com> said:
> 
> > Yes I want to do this. Rolling upgrades are possible. 
> > I do not think that anybody actually cares about the major number 
> > or the name of the device node. 
> 
> Thanks for the 0.6 -> 0.7 upgrade path.

> You need to manually fix the application configuration files up, custom
> scripts etc - for example, you forgot heartbeat's haresources, and if
> someone is running raw device access to drbd w/ a database...
> 
> This is _not_ a change we can push out. The major number _might_ be
> changed, but the device path absolutely has to stay stable.

Um. now, nobody actually has drbd 0.7.0 in production yet.
Or am I wrong?

and, you always can do rm /dev/nb0 ; ln -s /dev/{drbd0,nb0}
 :-) 


> You'll have to allow a transition period where we accept and work with
> the old configuration and setups, allow and encourage the sane new way
> for new deployments, and eventually "force" the migration in 0.8.x.
> 
> 0.7.0 -> 0.7.1 must work by just dropping it in place of the old
> version, or I'm going to have to patch that.

0.7.0 had a configurable major_nr as module parameter.
I could put that back in, (I only commented it anyways),
but now default it to be LANANA_DRBD_MAJOR now, instead of NBD_MAJOR.
when it is NBD_MAJOR, devfs name will be nbd.
if someone (suse) insists,
she can put some options major_nr=43 into modules.conf ...

konsensfähig?

	Lars