X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C718EA.5075FF02@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Tue, 5 Dec 2006 19:55:05 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C718EA.5075FF02"
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: Exclusive Access Control for Multiple Consoles
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 19:55:04 -0800
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E019F5434@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0138C37F@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Exclusive Access Control for Multiple Consoles
thread-index: AccYTGN0T9jEGFBDQKiSyg2MbHoKxgAVEYhQABHagDA=
From: "Shin Irie" <shin.irie@onstor.com>
To: "Chris Vandever" <chris.vandever@onstor.com>,
	"dl-cstech" <dl-cstech@onstor.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C718EA.5075FF02
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Chris,

The customer admitted that he logged onto both nodes of the cluster, and
made some changed at once, like 3, 2, 1, go! :-( The changes were
probably for the shares running on each node, but they go to the single
cluster DB. He should not have done that.

He claimed that ONStor should reject multiple requests from multiple
console. Do we need ECR for this, or do we already have it in our action
items?

--
Irie




> _____________________________________________=20
> From: 	Chris Vandever =20
> Sent:	Wednesday, December 06, 2006 4:19 AM
> To:	Shin Irie; dl-cstech
> Subject:	RE: Exclusive Access Control for Multiple Consoles
>=20
> No CLI command that accesses multiple records in the clusDb is atomic.
> We do not have transactions for the clusDb at that level.  This is a
> known problem.
>=20
> The "nfs share modify" command, like most commands, makes numerous
> accesses to the clusDb, and potentially numerous modifications.  If
> the command is run from multiple consoles such that one instance
> modifies a record that another instance is relying upon, it is likely
> that we will indeed screw up something.
>=20
> ChrisV
>=20
> _____________________________________________
> From: Shin Irie=20
> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 1:05 AM
> To: dl-cstech
> Subject: Exclusive Access Control for Multiple Consoles
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> A customer had a problem where all clients lost access to a share and
> recovered without any change on ONStor side (Case 3959).
>=20
> From the command history logged in the elog, I believe they issued
> several commands like 'nfs share modify' from multiple consoles. If we
> don't have any exclusive access control, especially for changes to the
> cluster database, this might have screwed up something.
>=20
> Do we have those access control mechanism? Currently they are running
> R1.3.1.10.
>=20
>=20
> --
> Irie
>=20

------_=_NextPart_001_01C718EA.5075FF02
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7650.28">
<TITLE>RE: Exclusive Access Control for Multiple Consoles</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Hi =
Chris,</FONT></SPAN>
</P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">The =
customer admitted that he logged onto both nodes of the cluster, and =
made some changed at once, like 3, 2, 1, go!</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =
LANG=3D"en-us"> <FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">:-(</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"> <FONT =
COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">The changes were probably for =
the shares running on each node, but they go to the single cluster DB. =
He should not have done that.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">He =
claimed that ONStor should reject multiple requests from multiple =
console. Do we need ECR for this, or do we already have it in our action =
items?</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">--</FONT></SPAN>

<BR><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Irie</FONT></SPAN>
</P>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"MS UI =
Gothic">_____________________________________________ </FONT></SPAN>

<BR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"MS UI Gothic">From: =
&nbsp;</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"> <FONT SIZE=3D1 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">Chris Vandever&nbsp; </FONT></SPAN>

<BR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"MS UI =
Gothic">Sent:&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=3D1 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">Wednesday, December 06, 2006 4:19 AM</FONT></SPAN>

<BR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"MS UI =
Gothic">To:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=3D1 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">Shin Irie; dl-cstech</FONT></SPAN>

<BR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"MS UI =
Gothic">Subject:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></B> =
<FONT SIZE=3D1 FACE=3D"Tahoma">RE: Exclusive Access Control for Multiple =
Consoles</FONT></SPAN>
</P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">No CLI command =
that accesses multiple records in the clusDb is atomic.&nbsp; We do not =
have transactions for the clusDb at that level.&nbsp; This is a known =
problem.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">The &#8220;nfs =
share modify&#8221; command, like most commands, makes numerous accesses =
to the clusDb, and potentially numerous modifications.&nbsp; If the =
command is run from multiple consoles such that one instance modifies a =
record that another instance is relying upon, it is likely that we will =
indeed screw up something.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">ChrisV</FONT></SPAN>
</P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma">_____________________________________________<BR>
</FONT><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma">From:</FONT></B><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma"> Shin Irie<BR>
</FONT><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma">Sent:</FONT></B><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma"> Tuesday, December 05, 2006 1:05 AM<BR>
</FONT><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma">To:</FONT></B><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Tahoma"> dl-cstech<BR>
</FONT><B><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma">Subject:</FONT></B><FONT =
SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Tahoma"> Exclusive Access Control for Multiple =
Consoles</FONT></SPAN>
</P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Hi,</FONT></SPAN>
</P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">A customer had a =
problem where all clients lost access to a share and recovered without =
any change on ONStor side (Case 3959).</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">From the command =
history logged in the elog, I believe they issued several commands like =
'nfs share modify' from multiple consoles. If we don't have any =
exclusive access control, especially for changes to the cluster =
database, this might have screwed up something.</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Do we have those =
access control mechanism? Currently they are running =
R1.3.1.10.</FONT></SPAN>
</P>
<BR>

<P><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">--</FONT></SPAN>

<BR><SPAN LANG=3D"ja"><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Irie</FONT></SPAN>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C718EA.5075FF02--
