[sheepdog-users] is --nohalt dangerous?

[Dietmar Maurer]

Please re-read the code. It does not 'relax anything'.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liu Yuan [mailto:namei.unix at gmail.com]
> Sent: Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2012 09:07
> To: Dietmar Maurer
> Cc: sheepdog-users at lists.wpkg.org
> Subject: Re: [sheepdog-users] is --nohalt dangerous?
> 
> On 07/18/2012 03:03 PM, Dietmar Maurer wrote:
> > So maybe the following would make --nohalt a bit safer?
> >
> > diff --git a/sheep/group.c b/sheep/group.c index 059656e..e9e2861
> > 100644
> > --- a/sheep/group.c
> > +++ b/sheep/group.c
> > @@ -1079,6 +1079,9 @@ void sd_leave_handler(struct sd_node *left,
> struct sd_node
> >         if (sys_can_halt()) {
> >                 if (current_vnode_info->nr_zones < sys->nr_copies)
> >                         sys_stat_set(SD_STATUS_HALT);
> > +       } else {
> > +               if (current_vnode_info->nr_zones <= (sys->nr_copies/2))
> > +                       sys_stat_set(SD_STATUS_HALT);
> >         }
> >
> >         sockfd_cache_del(&left->nid);
> 
> I don't think we should relax the halt condition, nr_zones >= nr_copies is the
> safest condition.
> 
> Thanks,
> Yuan
>