[DRBD-user] n00b question about generation numbers

malahal at us.ibm.com malahal at us.ibm.com
Fri Oct 19 19:12:44 CEST 2007

Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.

Lars Ellenberg [lars.ellenberg at linbit.com] wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 09:56:24AM -0700, malahal at us.ibm.com wrote:
> > I am trying to implement a better 'master selection' scheme in Linux
> > dm-mirror/LVM2 code.
> > 
> > I read that DRBD used to have generation number scheme instead of the
> > current UUID scheme. I read that the old 'generation number' scheme
> > doesn't work for more than 2 nodes. Can some please explain how/why?
> > Would a time stamped generation number help for more than 2 nodes?
> > 
> > I understand that a generation number scheme would NOT work for quick
> > resynchronization for more than 2 nodes, but would that help if we were
> > to do full-resynchronization?
> did you _read_ the papers at http://www.drbd.org/publications.html?
> and, why would you want to go with drbd 0.7 or older?
> you probably cannot maintain it,
> and we won't do that much longer either.

Thank you for your reply. I am not planning on running DRBD at all. I
just want to borrow ideas from DRBD code and implement them in Linux
LVM Mirror. Many things are common but few are different between
DRBD and Linux LVM Mirror. I am trying to understand, if generation
number itself would be sufficient for Linux LVM Mirror. Yes, I did read
the publications listed there.

Thanks, Malahal.

More information about the drbd-user mailing list