[linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared lun's

[linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared lun's

[Joshua Aune]

I have two systems that are connected to a SAN.  The SAN is exporting
the same 4 luns to each system (/dev/sd[b,c,d,e]).  Under normal
operation system1 will combine sdb with sdc into a vg and system2 will
combine sdd with sde into a vg with both vgs consisting of one large lv
and one small lv.  After the system is configured there will be no
modifications made to the LVM configuration.  LVM is configured on one
node and then copied over to the second node.

The million dollar question is, can system1 and system2 simultaneously
have both of the VGs active without hosing any data?  

I am not trying to have the same filesystem mounted simultaneously, just
have the LVs available simultaneously for failover needs

I know that this sort of config can be done with the GFS pool volume
manger but I have been told that many other VMs don't support this
behavior....

Thanks,
Josh

Re: [linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared LUNs

[Lamont R. Peterson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2355 bytes --]

On Monday 07 August 2006 03:59pm, Joshua Aune wrote:
> I have two systems that are connected to a SAN.  The SAN is exporting
> the same 4 luns to each system (/dev/sd[b,c,d,e]).  Under normal
> operation system1 will combine sdb with sdc into a vg and system2 will
> combine sdd with sde into a vg with both vgs consisting of one large lv
> and one small lv.  After the system is configured there will be no
> modifications made to the LVM configuration.  LVM is configured on one
> node and then copied over to the second node.
>
> The million dollar question is, can system1 and system2 simultaneously
> have both of the VGs active without hosing any data?

As I understand it, only if you are using a filesystem that supports clustered 
operations, like GFS.

> I am not trying to have the same filesystem mounted simultaneously, just
> have the LVs available simultaneously for failover needs

In that case, as long as you have some heartbeat or something that lets you 
know when the one system needs to take over the other's PVs.  The trick here 
is that if you lose your network connection, but the box is still accessing 
data on the LUNs, that could become problematic.  Maybe a tiny little shared 
GFS thing would allow your boxes a place to write some status info (a 
custom "heartbeat", if you will) so that a network disconnect or other issue 
won't cause false alarms.

Probably best to just use GFS.

> I know that this sort of config can be done with the GFS pool volume
> manger but I have been told that many other VMs don't support this
> behavior....

/me shrugs

Not sure about that as I don't have any SAN to play with :( .  Never tried it.
-- 
Lamont R. Peterson <peregrine@OpenBrainstem.net>
Founder [ http://blog.OpenBrainstem.net/peregrine/ ]
GPG Key fingerprint: 0E35 93C5 4249 49F0 EC7B  4DDD BE46 4732 6460 CCB5
  ___                   ____            _           _
 / _ \ _ __   ___ _ __ | __ ) _ __ __ _(_)_ __  ___| |_ ___ _ __ ___
| | | | '_ \ / _ \ '_ \|  _ \| '__/ _` | | '_ \/ __| __/ _ \ '_ ` _ \
| |_| | |_) |  __/ | | | |_) | | | (_| | | | | \__ \ ||  __/ | | | | |
 \___/| .__/ \___|_| |_|____/|_|  \__,_|_|_| |_|___/\__\___|_| |_| |_|
      |_|               Intelligent Open Source Software Engineering
                              [ http://www.OpenBrainstem.net/ ]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared LUNs

[Christian.Rohrmeier]

Hi,

One way to take care of this would be to use clustering software such as
HP's MC Service Guard. I'm assuming you want to make an HA cluster of some
sort because you specified that both servers do not need to access the same
FS simultaneously (in which case you'd want to use VXFS or GFS).

Using Service Guard, the FS in question is part of a cluster package, and
it is mounted by the cluster package, and is thus not specified in the
fstab.The mounting or unmounting of the FS is taken care of when the
package switches from one server to another, thus bringing its FSes with
it. The SAN LUNs are seen on both sides ofcourse, and the LVM config is
copied to both sides as well, its just only active and mounted on one side
at a time. This works very well.

-Christian


linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com wrote on 08.08.2006 08:50:36:

> On Monday 07 August 2006 03:59pm, Joshua Aune wrote:
> > I have two systems that are connected to a SAN.  The SAN is exporting
> > the same 4 luns to each system (/dev/sd[b,c,d,e]).  Under normal
> > operation system1 will combine sdb with sdc into a vg and system2 will
> > combine sdd with sde into a vg with both vgs consisting of one large lv
> > and one small lv.  After the system is configured there will be no
> > modifications made to the LVM configuration.  LVM is configured on one
> > node and then copied over to the second node.
> >
> > The million dollar question is, can system1 and system2 simultaneously
> > have both of the VGs active without hosing any data?
>
> As I understand it, only if you are using a filesystem that
supportsclustered
> operations, like GFS.
>
> > I am not trying to have the same filesystem mounted simultaneously,
just
> > have the LVs available simultaneously for failover needs
>
> In that case, as long as you have some heartbeat or something that lets
you
> know when the one system needs to take over the other's PVs.  The trick
here
> is that if you lose your network connection, but the box is still
accessing
> data on the LUNs, that could become problematic.  Maybe a tiny little
shared
> GFS thing would allow your boxes a place to write some status info (a
> custom "heartbeat", if you will) so that a network disconnect or other
issue
> won't cause false alarms.
>
> Probably best to just use GFS.
>
> > I know that this sort of config can be done with the GFS pool volume
> > manger but I have been told that many other VMs don't support this
> > behavior....
>
> /me shrugs
>
> Not sure about that as I don't have any SAN to play with :( .  Nevertried
it.
> --
> Lamont R. Peterson <peregrine@OpenBrainstem.net>
> Founder [ http://blog.OpenBrainstem.net/peregrine/ ]
> GPG Key fingerprint: 0E35 93C5 4249 49F0 EC7B  4DDD BE46 4732 6460 CCB5
>   ___                   ____            _           _
>  / _ \ _ __   ___ _ __ | __ ) _ __ __ _(_)_ __  ___| |_ ___ _ __ ___
> | | | | '_ \ / _ \ '_ \|  _ \| '__/ _` | | '_ \/ __| __/ _ \ '_ ` _ \
> | |_| | |_) |  __/ | | | |_) | | | (_| | | | | \__ \ ||  __/ | | | | |
>  \___/| .__/ \___|_| |_|____/|_|  \__,_|_|_| |_|___/\__\___|_| |_| |_|
>       |_|               Intelligent Open Source Software Engineering
>                               [ http://www.OpenBrainstem.net/ ]
> [attachment "att8h21q.dat" deleted by Christian
> Rohrmeier/BE/USR/SHG] _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/

Re: [linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared LUNs

[Joshua Aune]

On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 00:50 -0600, Lamont R. Peterson wrote:
> > The million dollar question is, can system1 and system2
> simultaneously
> > have both of the VGs active without hosing any data?
                                                  ^^ lvm metadata
> 
> As I understand it, only if you are using a filesystem that supports
> clustered operations, like GFS.
> 

Just to be clear, I should be able to issue [lv|vg]change -ay on both
systems simultaneously with no LVM corruption (data integrity will be
maintained by not starting a filesystems on both nodes simultaneously)
(as long as I don't start the filesystem on both nodes).

I would use something like GFS, but this is a HA setup for Lustre
oss/mds nodes :) 

Thanks again,
Josh

RE: [linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared lun's

[David Chan]

 
Don't think LVM is cluster aware.  Doing so can potentially cause loss
of LV's/data due to metadata corruption on the LVM level.  
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com [mailto:linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com]
On Behalf Of Joshua Aune
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 3:00 PM
To: LVM general discussion and development
Subject: [linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared lun's

I have two systems that are connected to a SAN.  The SAN is exporting
the same 4 luns to each system (/dev/sd[b,c,d,e]).  Under normal
operation system1 will combine sdb with sdc into a vg and system2 will
combine sdd with sde into a vg with both vgs consisting of one large lv
and one small lv.  After the system is configured there will be no
modifications made to the LVM configuration.  LVM is configured on one
node and then copied over to the second node.

The million dollar question is, can system1 and system2 simultaneously
have both of the VGs active without hosing any data?  

I am not trying to have the same filesystem mounted simultaneously, just
have the LVs available simultaneously for failover needs

I know that this sort of config can be done with the GFS pool volume
manger but I have been told that many other VMs don't support this
behavior....

Thanks,
Josh

_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/

Re: [linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared lun's

[Luca Berra]

On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:23:04AM -0700, David Chan wrote:
> 
>Don't think LVM is cluster aware.  Doing so can potentially cause loss
>of LV's/data due to metadata corruption on the LVM level.  
LVM2 supports cluster locking, either using internal locking which works
with CMAN or GULM, or by using an external locking library that can be
customized to work with every cluster software that supports locking of
resources.

L.

-- 
Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it
        Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
 /"\
 \ /     ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
  X        AGAINST HTML MAIL
 / \

Re: [linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared lun's

[Sid Polak]

Luca Berra wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:23:04AM -0700, David Chan wrote:
> > 
> >Don't think LVM is cluster aware.  Doing so can potentially cause loss
> >of LV's/data due to metadata corruption on the LVM level.  
> LVM2 supports cluster locking, either using internal locking which works
> with CMAN or GULM, or by using an external locking library that can be
> customized to work with every cluster software that supports locking of
>resources.

And what about tags? Could I use hostname tag to activate LVs on one host OR
another host which hostname is equal to the tag? That is not failover but
it could reduce recovery time after the failure of one of the hosts. Isn't it?

SidP

Re: [linux-lvm] Running LVM on shared lun's

[Luca Berra]

On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:11:24AM +0400, Sid Polak wrote:
>Luca Berra wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:23:04AM -0700, David Chan wrote:
>> > 
>> >Don't think LVM is cluster aware.  Doing so can potentially cause loss
>> >of LV's/data due to metadata corruption on the LVM level.  
>> LVM2 supports cluster locking, either using internal locking which works
>> with CMAN or GULM, or by using an external locking library that can be
>> customized to work with every cluster software that supports locking of
>>resources.
>
>And what about tags? Could I use hostname tag to activate LVs on one host OR
>another host which hostname is equal to the tag? That is not failover but
>it could reduce recovery time after the failure of one of the hosts. Isn't it?
>
yes.

L.

-- 
Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it
        Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
 /"\
 \ /     ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
  X        AGAINST HTML MAIL
 / \