From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (ext-mx11.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.110.16]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r26BKXcm012989 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 06:20:33 -0500 Received: from h01.hoster-ok.com (h01.hoster-ok.com [88.86.111.110]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r26BKUDN002058 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 06:20:31 -0500 Message-ID: <5137267A.7040000@hoster-ok.com> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 14:20:26 +0300 From: Vladislav Bogdanov 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> <5137137B.5010800@pse-consulting.de> In-Reply-To: <5137137B.5010800@pse-consulting.de> 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" To: Andreas Pflug Cc: LVM general discussion and development 06.03.2013 12:59, Andreas Pflug wrote: > 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. But you receive "Invalid argument" error from the cluster layer, so is should go from a local clvmd if you are correct about node IDs. You may run clvmd in a debugging mode as well to catch what goes wrong. > 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. You probably should try to test that on a test cluster first (as I do) although I'm almost sure it works correctly in setup I described. >> >> 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. That could be the problem btw. I did neither test nor look at openais module implementation in clvmd, because I had plenty problems with it (actually with LCK under it) in the past, so I even forced to use corosync (CPG) + dlm instead of detected openais (CPG+LCK) for older systems (look at -I switch of clvmd). And, openais is deprecated upstream, so I do not see any reason to use it. Even gfs_controld (which is probably the only well-known user of openais services) actually does not strictly require it, at least I was able to port it to pure CPG+DLM with dlm4 on top of corosync2, which is not compatible with openais plugins. Also you may need quorum patch found in this list, it does its job well. > Could this be a reason for the x-lock failure as well? Can you please reword? Vladislav