Simpler Navigation for Servers and Operating Systems - Please Update Your Bookmarks
Completed: a much simpler Servers and Operating Systems section of the Community. We combined many of the older boards, so you won't have to click through so many levels to get at the information you need. Check the consolidated boards here as many sub-forums are now single boards.
If you have bookmarked forums or discussion boards in Servers and Operating Systems, we suggest you check and update them as needed.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Single Path vs. QLogic Failover

ALBERTO ROCHA_1
Occasional Visitor

Single Path vs. QLogic Failover

I've two BL20p G3 attached to an MSA1000 w/ 12 mirrored disks (6 on channel A + 6 on channel B) w/ redundant controller, running RHEL4-U4 x86_64 w/ PSP 7.60 drivers.

If i select "SinglePath" when configuring HBA it has a strange behavior: on both nodes, 'fdisk' reports /dev/sdg-h-i-j-k-l and not /dev/sda-b-c-d-e-f

If i select "QLogicFailover", 'fdisk' simply doesn't load /dev/sdX, despite 'lssd' command from 'fibreutils' reports on both nodes:
sda 0,0,0,1 COMPAQ MSA1000 VOLUME 4.48
sdb 0,0,0,2 COMPAQ MSA1000 VOLUME 4.48
sdc 0,0,0,3 COMPAQ MSA1000 VOLUME 4.48
sdd 0,0,0,4 COMPAQ MSA1000 VOLUME 4.48
sde 0,0,0,5 COMPAQ MSA1000 VOLUME 4.48
sdf 0,0,0,6 COMPAQ MSA1000 VOLUME 4.48

First beginners question: once i have a redundant controller and last drivers, i should use "QLogicFailover", right?!

Second question: should i see /dev/sda,b,c,d,e,f for the first node end /dev/sdg,h,i,j,k,l for the second node or should they be equal?

Thx
2 REPLIES
Ivan Ferreira
Honored Contributor

Re: Single Path vs. QLogic Failover

First beginners question: once i have a redundant controller and last drivers, i should use "QLogicFailover", right?!

Yes, you should use qlogic failover for hosts with multiple redundant HBAs.

Second question: should i see /dev/sda,b,c,d,e,f for the first node end /dev/sdg,h,i,j,k,l for the second node or should they be equal?

You cannot warranty that would be equal but could be. It depends of the SCSI devices attached and the discovery order. Normally, if the hardware is very similar (internal disks, and so) the device files can be the same in the servers.
Por que hacerlo dificil si es posible hacerlo facil? - Why do it the hard way, when you can do it the easy way?
ALBERTO ROCHA_1
Occasional Visitor

Re: Single Path vs. QLogic Failover

Some more hits about the configuration:

i) The contents of '/etc/modprobe.conf' that confirms QLogicFailover driver:

options qla2xxx ql2xmaxqdepth=16 qlport_down_retry=30 ql2xloginretrycount=16 ql2xfailover=1 ql2xlbType=1 ql2xautorestore=0x80
remove qla2xxx /sbin/modprobe -r --first-time --ignore-remove qla2xxx && { /sbin/modprobe -r --ignore-remove qla2xxx_conf; }

resulting '/etc/hp_qla2x00.conf':
qdepth = 16
port_down_retry_count = 30
login_retry_count = 16
failover = 1
load_balancing = 1
excludemodel = 0x0
auto_restore = 0x80

ii) The contents of '/var/log/messages' i can allways see entrys like:
kernel: Buffer I/O error on device sdX, logical block 0

The thruth is that 'fdisk' only see partitions at '/dev/cciss/c0d0' and none at '/dev/cciss/c0d1'

Thx