[linux-lvm] LVM Question

[linux-lvm] LVM Question

[mmclinn]

Hello, 

First off, I'm a big supporter of LVM, I use it on a 56gig array at home
regularly without any problems and I can't wait to see it migrate into
the stable kernel tree.

I do have a couple of questions for people with more experience than
I...

I am currently preparing to setup a new main file server for my company.
It will be linux based, and will store approximately 25 gigs of data
that
will be used constantly.  LVM would be _really_ useful on this machine. 

I'm wondering peoples opinions about whether or not LVM is ready to be
used in
a business environment.  In other words, how stable has this code been
for people?
I have run into no problems, but I have been using it informally thus
far.

Also, I am wondering whether or not future versions of LVM will always
be compatible with the current implementation?  Will there ever be a
point when I would need to
reinstall my LVM volumes to upgrade to the latest version of LVM?

Any opinions, thoughts, cautions, advice, ect.. would be much
appreciated.

Thanks all!


-Michael McLinn

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM Question

[Brian Wolfe]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1563 bytes --]

	I'm running 2.2.10+lvm 0.7 on a dual PIII-450/512MB server. It's operating stabily as an ftp and http server for distribution of Debian and Linux kernel. I run about 750Kbps continual bandwidth 24x7. I have used lvm since i upgraded the server a few weeks ago.

	No problems detected at all so far...

	Brian Wolfe
	TerraBox.Com

On Wed, Sep 08, 1999 at 10:24:15AM -0400, mmclinn@cdt.com wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello, 
> 
> First off, I'm a big supporter of LVM, I use it on a 56gig array at home
> regularly without any problems and I can't wait to see it migrate into
> the stable kernel tree.
> 
> I do have a couple of questions for people with more experience than
> I...
> 
> I am currently preparing to setup a new main file server for my company.
> It will be linux based, and will store approximately 25 gigs of data
> that
> will be used constantly.  LVM would be _really_ useful on this machine. 
> 
> I'm wondering peoples opinions about whether or not LVM is ready to be
> used in
> a business environment.  In other words, how stable has this code been
> for people?
> I have run into no problems, but I have been using it informally thus
> far.
> 
> Also, I am wondering whether or not future versions of LVM will always
> be compatible with the current implementation?  Will there ever be a
> point when I would need to
> reinstall my LVM volumes to upgrade to the latest version of LVM?
> 
> Any opinions, thoughts, cautions, advice, ect.. would be much
> appreciated.
> 
> Thanks all!
> 
> 
> -Michael McLinn

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 290 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM Question

[S. Ryan Quick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 2493 bytes --]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

I am running LVM 0.7 on a compaq proliant 6500 4xPIII 450/512MB with about 72GB in the primary volume for
SAP/R3 print queues and hierarchical storage under Debian 2.1/2.2.10 and have had no problems.  I am using
software RAID mirroring on these drives as well, no problems.

Ryan


> > 
> > 
> > Hello, 
> > 
> > First off, I'm a big supporter of LVM, I use it on a 56gig array at home
> > regularly without any problems and I can't wait to see it migrate into
> > the stable kernel tree.
> > 
> > I do have a couple of questions for people with more experience than
> > I...
> > 
> > I am currently preparing to setup a new main file server for my company.
> > It will be linux based, and will store approximately 25 gigs of data
> > that
> > will be used constantly.  LVM would be _really_ useful on this machine. 
> > 
> > I'm wondering peoples opinions about whether or not LVM is ready to be
> > used in
> > a business environment.  In other words, how stable has this code been
> > for people?
> > I have run into no problems, but I have been using it informally thus
> > far.
> > 
> > Also, I am wondering whether or not future versions of LVM will always
> > be compatible with the current implementation?  Will there ever be a
> > point when I would need to
> > reinstall my LVM volumes to upgrade to the latest version of LVM?
> > 
> > Any opinions, thoughts, cautions, advice, ect.. would be much
> > appreciated.
> > 
> > Thanks all!
> > 
> > 
> > -Michael McLinn
> 

%                                                       %%%%%%%%%%
%%           S. Ryan Quick                               %%%%%%%%%
%%%           UNIX Systems Engineer                       %%%%%%%%
%%%%           Phaedo Consulting, Inc. -- Exec VP          %%%%%%%
%%%%%                                                       %%%%%%
%%%%%%         www.phaedo.com/ryan/  ryan@phaedo.com         %%%%%
%%%%%%%       ------------ PGP FingerPrint -------------      %%%%
%%%%%%%%  CF 19 6B BA 31 8E B8 8E  20 DF 4F 2B 2E 69 81 F5     %%%
%%%%%%%%%     ------------------------------------------        %%
%%%%%%%%%%                                                       %

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBN9a47fUYDAQiV+tNAQFp6wP/XHe2MuKSRXkQKD6l8Ely9qtM6OvNHxL0
BzedsqdfrEUyPMAyiyqfKQD0+YQ/kz5HluER7HCeekm5ZhOCDPEjOR419Gfees/b
O/d2h/1AyP2zLN3WLKhaxvU9sv+lCYK8c0rTqkinrlgnxExPh2G/6zUBIUKc13rf
Sf1lo80fMS0=
=GUWK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[-- Attachment #2: Type: APPLICATION/PGP-SIGNATURE, Size: 290 bytes --]

[linux-lvm] LVM Question

[Jay Lee]

I'm planning to use LVM on my new linux system, I'm just wondering can I use
internal and external drives together as one?

If the external drive fails, what will happen?

Thanks,

Jay

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM Question

[bscott]

On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, at 5:10pm, jaylee@golden.net wrote:
> I'm planning to use LVM on my new linux system, I'm just wondering can I
> use internal and external drives together as one?

  You sure can.

> If the external drive fails, what will happen?

  All LVs (Logical Volumes) with extents on the failed drive will be
unavailable.

  For most cases, that means that all data on both disks will be lost.

-- 
Ben Scott <bscott@ntisys.com>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do  |
| not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. |
| All information is provided without warranty of any kind.              |

[linux-lvm] LVM question

[John Diana]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 841 bytes --]

Heinz,

In this news article 
http://lists.sistina.com/pipermail/linux-lvm/2001-June/007667.html  you 
mentioned "BTW: future versions of the LVM will probably have uuid support 
on the 
command line like for eg. "vgchange -ay -u VolumeGroupUUID 
VolumeGroupName".

Does this exist yet? 
I am in a situation where I have a storage subsystem which is capable of 
making copies of disks completely by itself and it would be  handy for 
smaller shops if the subsystem could make a copy of the underlying disks 
of a VG and then those disks could be brought online on the same host as 
another VG. I am at version 1.0.5-45

I can do this with AIX and recreatevg command and I am thinking the above 
would get me close to getting it done with Linux.

Thanks,

John W. Diana
IBM San Integration Test
jdiana@us.ibm.com
512.838.1482
Tieline 678-1482

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1043 bytes --]

[linux-lvm] LVM Question

[Matthias Rudolph]

Hello all,
 
how can I force to activate a VG on a special device file?
One FC Storage Disk is visible over two pathes (sda and sdb). We use our
Path Management Software. It creates sddlmaa. After creating the VG the
sddlmaa is ACTIVE - OK. But after deactivating and activating sdb is ACTIVE.
This means: no pathfailover.
 
Here a typescript:
 
# fdisk -l /dev/sd*
-> scannt nach neuen disks und zeigt sie an

# fdisk /dev/sddlmaa
-> Partition 1 anlegen �ber gesmten Bereich
-> Partitions System ID von 83 (Linux) auf 8e (Linux LVM) �ndern

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# pvscan
pvscan -- reading all physical volumes (this may take a while...)
pvscan -- ERROR "pv_read(): read" reading physical volumes

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# pvcreate /dev/sddlmaa1
pvcreate -- physical volume "/dev/sddlmaa1" successfully created

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# pvscan
pvscan -- reading all physical volumes (this may take a while...)
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sddlmaa1" is in no VG  [6.87 GB]
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sda1"     is in no VG  [6.87 GB]
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sdb1"     is in no VG  [6.87 GB]
pvscan -- total: 3 [20.61 GB] / in use: 0 [0] / in no VG: 3 [20.61 GB]

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# lvmdiskscan
lvmdiskscan -- reading all disks / partitions (this may take a while...)
lvmdiskscan -- /dev/sddlmaa1 [       6.87 GB] new LVM whole disk
lvmdiskscan -- /dev/sda1     [       6.87 GB] new LVM whole disk
lvmdiskscan -- /dev/sdb1     [       6.87 GB] new LVM whole disk
lvmdiskscan -- /dev/hda1     [     103.33 MB] free whole disk
lvmdiskscan -- 4 disks
lvmdiskscan -- 4 whole disks
lvmdiskscan -- 0 loop devices
lvmdiskscan -- 0 multiple devices
lvmdiskscan -- 0 network block devices
lvmdiskscan -- 6 partitions
lvmdiskscan -- 0 LVM physical volume partitions

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# vgcreate vg00 /dev/sddlmaa1
vgcreate -- INFO: using default physical extent size 4 MB
vgcreate -- INFO: maximum logical volume size is 255.99 Gigabyte
vgcreate -- doing automatic backup of volume group "vg00"
vgcreate -- volume group "vg00" successfully created and activate

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# vgscan
vgscan -- reading all physical volumes (this may take a while...)
vgscan -- found active volume group "vg00"
vgscan -- "/etc/lvmtab" and "/etc/lvmtab.d" successfully created
vgscan -- WARNING: This program does not do a VGDA backup of your volume
group

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# vgdisplay -v
--- Volume group ---
VG Name               vg00
VG Access             read/write
VG Status             available/resizable
VG #                  0
MAX LV                256
Cur LV                0
Open LV               0
MAX LV Size           255.99 GB
Max PV                256
Cur PV                1
Act PV                1
VG Size               6.87 GB
PE Size               4 MB
Total PE              1758
Alloc PE / Size       0 / 0
Free  PE / Size       1758 / 6.87 GB
VG UUID               INPtDi-kBhS-USzo-WuCW-xQWZ-DFkq-NerC0u

--- No logical volumes defined in "vg00" ---


--- Physical volumes ---
PV Name (#)           /dev/sddlmaa1 (1)
PV Status             available / allocatable
Total PE / Free PE    1758 / 1758

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# pvscan
pvscan -- reading all physical volumes (this may take a while...)
pvscan -- ACTIVE   PV "/dev/sddlmaa1" of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sda1"     of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sdb1"     of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# vgchange -an vg00
vgchange -- volume group "vg00" successfully deactivated

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# pvscan
pvscan -- reading all physical volumes (this may take a while...)
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sddlmaa1" of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sda1"     of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sdb1"     of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]
pvscan -- total: 3 [20.61 GB] / in use: 3 [20.61 GB] / in no VG: 0 [0]

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# vgchange -ay vg00
vgchange -- volume group "vg00" successfully activated

[root@D-SRV-L-43 root]# pvscan
pvscan -- reading all physical volumes (this may take a while...)
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sddlmaa1" of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]
pvscan -- inactive PV "/dev/sda1"     of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]
pvscan -- ACTIVE   PV "/dev/sdb1"     of VG "vg00" [6.87 GB / 6.87 GB free]
pvscan -- total: 3 [20.61 GB] / in use: 3 [20.61 GB] / in no VG: 0 [0]
 

Best Regards

Matthias Rudolph
Country Software Specialist 

HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS GmbH
Im Steingrund 10
D-63303 Dreieich-Buchschlag
Tel:   +49 (0)6103 804 1208
Mob: +49 (0)171 240 9326
matthias.rudolph@hds.com <mailto:matthias.rudolph@hds.com>  


This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any
unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this
e-mail is strictly forbidden.

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM Question

[Mark W. Jeanmougin]

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 12:49:00 -0000, Matthias Rudolph
<Matthias.Rudolph@hds.com> wrote:
> how can I force to activate a VG on a special device file?
> One FC Storage Disk is visible over two pathes (sda and sdb). We use our
> Path Management Software. It creates sddlmaa. After creating the VG the
> sddlmaa is ACTIVE - OK. But after deactivating and activating sdb is ACTIVE.
> This means: no pathfailover.

Matthias,

If you look in /etc/lvm/lvm.conf, there is a line in there that will
explain how you can exclude certain devices from a vgscan.  man
lvm.conf should help you out.

I'd suggest excluding /dev/sd[ab] or maybe /dev/sd?

Hope this helps...

MJ

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM Question

[Luca Berra]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:49:00PM -0000, Matthias Rudolph wrote:
>Hello all,
> 
>how can I force to activate a VG on a special device file?
>One FC Storage Disk is visible over two pathes (sda and sdb). We use our
>Path Management Software. It creates sddlmaa. After creating the VG the
>sddlmaa is ACTIVE - OK. But after deactivating and activating sdb is ACTIVE.
>This means: no pathfailover.

switch to lvm2 and use filters in /etc/lvm/lvm.conf

-- 
Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it
        Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
 /"\
 \ /     ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
  X        AGAINST HTML MAIL
 / \