From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (ext-mx15.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.110.20]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r269xmPL030807 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 04:59:48 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.17.9]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r269xhfl028766 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 04:59:46 -0500 Message-ID: <5137137B.5010800@pse-consulting.de> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 10:59:23 +0100 From: Andreas Pflug MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <513090CA.8050904@pse-consulting.de> <5136F2F1.3020202@pse-consulting.de> <5136F738.1010707@hoster-ok.com> <5137091A.4070300@pse-consulting.de> <51370DDB.5010002@hoster-ok.com> In-Reply-To: <51370DDB.5010002@hoster-ok.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM snapshot with Clustered VG Reply-To: 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: Vladislav Bogdanov Cc: LVM general discussion and development Am 06.03.13 10:35, schrieb Vladislav Bogdanov: > 06.03.2013 12:15, Andreas Pflug wrote: >> I made sure it's not active on other nodes: lvchange -an vg/locktest ; >> lvchange -aly vg/locktest >>> And do you run clvmd from that build tree as well? >>> >>> Also, can you please try attached patch (on top of that one you have)? I >>> polished conversion a bit more, denying -an if volume is ex-locked >>> somewhere and other fixes to logic. >> I tried that additional patch. I'm running this test versions on my test >> node only (including clvmd), the other nodes are still running clvmd >> 2.2.95 (I guess this shouldn't matter since all are inactive). Same result: > I believe this matters, because error you see is received from a remote > node. Is node with ID 7400a8c0 local? Yes, that's the test node. Hm, not funny if I have to upgrade all nodes on the production system... I'm a little surprised that remote inactive nodes need to be aware of that force-exclusive stuff. > > I'm running corosync 1.4.2 (debian wheezy). > Which cluster manager interface does clvmd detect? corosync or openais? > You should use former, openais one is(was) using LCK service which is > very unstable. It's using openais. I'm not too happy about the stability, so maybe I'd switch to corosync now. Could this be a reason for the x-lock failure as well? Regards, Andreas