From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <493EB3A0.6020306@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 18:06:24 +0000 From: "Bryn M. Reeves" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] shift PV from disk to raid device? References: <493E48DE.3070705@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: bmr@redhat.com, LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: maillists@conactive.com, LVM general discussion and development Kai Schaetzl wrote: > Stuart D. Gathman wrote on Tue, 9 Dec 2008 11:54:08 -0500 (EST): > > Hallo, thanks for the suggestions. I'll try to follow that logically and with > possible commands, see below with comments/questions. > >> 1) remove sda from md2 array > > mdadm /dev/md2 --fail /dev/sda3 --remove /dev/sda3 > >> 2) use dd or pvremove to clear PV info in md2. This should not >> affect sda since sda is removed from md2 > > md2 shouldn't have PV info. do you mean sdb3? (this would destroy my data on > sdb3 then), so: Are you sure? If the MD array is a straightforward RAID1 mirror of two SD devices then the PV data should also be visible on the MD device - see my other post. > vgchange dom0 -an (deactivate the LVs on sdb3) > pvremove /dev/sdb3 ? > After this point a pvdisplay should show /dev/sda3 as the active PV for dom0. > (At the moment I get: "using /dev/sdb3 not /dev/sda3") > >> 3) pvcreate md2 as a new PV and add to volume group > > pvcreate /dev/md2 > I fear I will get "device busy", not? (just a feeling from recent experience > with juggling with md and lvm that are on top of each other) > vgextend dom0 /dev/md2 > (dom0 then consists of sda3 and md2) If there are still active LVs (or if the LVM2 tools recognise md2 as a PV) then you will get an error here - either that the device could not be opened exclusively (LVs present) or that you can't initialise the new PV without '-ff' as it is already part of a volume group. Regards, Bryn.