From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phillip Susi Subject: Re: Re: LVM on dmraid breakage Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:27:34 -0400 Message-ID: <46BB4E86.7090000@cfl.rr.com> References: <46B0EAEF.6090305@cfl.rr.com> <20070802065012.GA28687@percy.comedia.it> <46B1B5E1.1050406@redhat.com> <46B251BB.1010004@cfl.rr.com> <20070807210359.GA2064@agk.fab.redhat.com> <46BA2FCC.1040001@cfl.rr.com> <20070808214538.GR2064@agk.fab.redhat.com> Reply-To: device-mapper development Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070808214538.GR2064@agk.fab.redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com To: device-mapper development , "ATARAID (eg, Promise Fasttrak, Highpoint 370) related discussions" , linux-lvm@redhat.com List-Id: dm-devel.ids Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > But I don't yet see why it didn't also open the other devices, write a warning > message about duplicate IDs, and do the right thing and give them > precedence. Why would it open the other devices? LVM does not scan /dev/mapper/*, only /dev/sd*. Since it does not scan the /dev/mapper devices for pvs, it sees no duplicates and can not "do the right thing".