From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:33:59 -0500 From: dmeyer@dmeyer.net Subject: [linux-lvm] hard-lock seems to have caused serious LVM problems Message-ID: <20010115153359.A10551@jhereg.dmeyer.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-lvm@sistina.com In article <20010115172200.A31217@srv.t-online.de> you write: > On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 11:03:58AM -0500, dmeyer@dmeyer.net wrote: > > Interestingly enough, something seems to have fixed my PVs in the > > meantime - now they all have every UUID. Either activating the VG or > > running vgck must have done it. > > No, it doesn't happen while activating VGs or checking them. > > The following tools call vg_write_with_pv_and_lv() in the library > which in turn calls pv_write_uuidlist() to do the UUID list update: Maybe it was calling vgscan on the messed up VG once I managed to get it online did it, then. I didn't call any of the others. > You must have run one of those tools in order to update the UUID list. > It is still rather interesting what caused the mess you reported in the first > place. I wonder if it wasn't somehow related to calling vgscan -d and getting seg faults in the middle of it. Or, more likely, running vgscan in the debugger trying to extract more information about what was going on. In any case, I hope fervantly never to have the opportunity to find out again :-). -- David M. Meyer dmeyer@dmeyer.net