[linux-lvm] Does LVM have any multipath failover capabilities?

[linux-lvm] Does LVM have any multipath failover capabilities?

[Chris Worley]

For example, two iSCSI drives are actually the same drive provided via
two different subnets: if one of the drives becomes unresponsive, I
need LVM to seamlessly failover to the other one.

Otherwise, what's the right way to handle this?

Thanks,

Chris

Re: [linux-lvm] Does LVM have any multipath failover capabilities?

[Chandra Seetharaman]

On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 17:27 -0600, Chris Worley wrote:
> For example, two iSCSI drives are actually the same drive provided via
> two different subnets: if one of the drives becomes unresponsive, I
> need LVM to seamlessly failover to the other one.
> 
> Otherwise, what's the right way to handle this?

Build lvm on top of a multipathed device (which comprises of the two
paths), with a priority callout that gives higher priority to one path
than the other.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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] Does LVM have any multipath failover capabilities?

[brem belguebli]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1443 bytes --]

Or you could simply use dm-multipath in round-robin fashion without having
to manage priorities etc...

This would bring you :

      - More performance if the device at the other side can take the load
      - Native failover, if on path dies you'll still have the second path
active.

On LVM point of view, you just have to pvcreate the mutilpath device
(/dev/mapper/mpathX if friendly_user_name true or /dev/mapper/<your disk
UUID>)

Brem


2009/9/2, Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@us.ibm.com>:
>
>
> On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 17:27 -0600, Chris Worley wrote:
> > For example, two iSCSI drives are actually the same drive provided via
> > two different subnets: if one of the drives becomes unresponsive, I
> > need LVM to seamlessly failover to the other one.
> >
> > Otherwise, what's the right way to handle this?
>
> Build lvm on top of a multipathed device (which comprises of the two
> paths), with a priority callout that gives higher priority to one path
> than the other.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2201 bytes --]