Comment 3 for bug 1095633

I have written a patch against Folsom, which implement those two fixes.

1) we repeat Refresh request if the monitor finish time returned by DFM was older than our first request. Unfortunately, this introduces a new requirement. Driver host and DFM host should be time synchronized.

2) Instead of running
server.DfmObjectRefresh(.., ChildType='lun_path')
we run
server.DfmObjectRefresh(.., MonitorNames=['file_system', 'lun'])

The former will trigger DFM lun monitor. The later will trigger both file_system and lun monitor. File_system monitor is needed to discover newly created qtree.

> My question is whether it would slow down operations at all in the 85-90% of the time when DFM does the right thing.

I would say it might be slower even if everything works perfectly on DFM side. We trigger two monitors instead of one. Weather they run concurrently, I don't know. Lun monitor seems to be always slower than file_system monitor.