* [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! @ 2001-01-03 17:44 Daniel Mitzlaff 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Daniel Mitzlaff @ 2001-01-03 17:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-lvm; +Cc: hackbyte Hello there.. Joe Thornber wrote something like: >Grab the latest code from the LVM_0-9-patches branch of cvs. You will >need to repatch/build the kernel module as well as the userland tools. Hmm, sorry but – as i sayd in my last mail – CVS snapshots for a machine which is imho _very mission critical_ is the last thing that i can add to the "i have no backups" line .. ;) If i had to wait for the next release of lvm, it's ok. If i had to use an old version of LVM, ok ...... But – please can someone add this to the INSTALL file? ;) >The lvm-2.2.17 and 2.2.18 patches apply cleanly to the vanilla >kernel + rawio. The redhat kernel is almost certainly not a vanilla >kernel. (smile) i wrote ---- I use a native RH6.2 installation w/o any updates/fixes (except for network security), using 2.2.17 and 2.2.18 kernel-tarballs ---- There's a little difference between "tarballs" (mostly downloaded from ftp.kernel.org) and RPM's which came in most cases from redhat or rpmfind and are "adapted" versions to run easilyon RH boxes. I took the vanilla tarballs from kernel.org;) And, i can't find any 2.2.18 patches on the ftp servers (again, cvs is no choice;) ok .... but: >I don't think 0.9 is quite ready for production systems. Maybe you >should play with 0.8. Yessa, that's what i want to hear – why it is not documented in the install or readme file? How can users, which thinks after reading your doc's, that all seems to be ok, bug-less and right stable, how can these user see which version is stable?;) I'm such a user, but (remember) i know what i do, and i'm wondering about these (initially) cool piece of software;( Hhhm, i think i'll try a little bit around with 0.8, giving cvs a try (but not for real usage!), and really hope that the administrative persons learn to declare stable and unstable versions. (smile) Other question, what is the reason to swap on lvm? ;) Because, as in swapon manual described, the kernel already can swap on several devices and can handle paralel-swapping on more than one partition .. ;) Greetings hackbyte -> hackbyte@gmx.de IRCNet hackbyte @ #linux.de,+linux.de P.s.: Sorry, i just use actually Staroffice on windows for my mails, it's not really good (smile) - i'll fix it soon;) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <hackbyte@gmx.de>]
* [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! @ 2001-01-03 13:13 ` Daniel Mitzlaff 2001-01-03 13:55 ` Joe Thornber ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Daniel Mitzlaff @ 2001-01-03 13:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-lvm Hello there, first, i'm new to LVM but i understand the concepts – it's nice;) 2nd thing, YES i REALLY know what i do – even if it seems that i don't.. ;) Ok, just my setup: A Clear RH6.2 w/ kernel 2.2.14 "-5.0" from the rh cd, running on a 266K6 w/ DFI Board (wintel TX chipset) + a Adaptec AHA2940AU (AIC-7861). DDRS39130W 9,1G/SDA DDRS34560W 4,3G/SDB DTLA307015 15G/HDA DJNA352030 20G/HDB DTLA307045 45G/HDD DTTA351010 10G/HDC I think, it's cool to use the SCSI drives to boot from plain ext2 partitions (for some security and recovery reasons), and let the kernel handle 2 swap partitions with the same priority (which will let the kernel interleave and stripe the swap space itself – whoa, boosting swap performace;). Ok, then i want to build a big vg over all drives. Create a LV with 2 stripes (hoping that it will everytime use 2 different busses;) and a small LV using the left free extends on the VG. First, i ran into the same problems as reported before here on the list, vgmerge and vgextend give me OOPS while extending the LE counter for the VG. BUT, all my drives are filled up with data, there's NO BACKUP(!), and no way to take more than a single drive free for reformatting. So, i tried the patches sent by Heinz – not really knowing where to patch it – in the lvm-userland, recompiled – no change at all. Please, tell me if it is correct to use the patch at the userland-tools instead of patching the kernel-parts. And, can you tell me (and others) in which order we have to see the patch?, plain patch for native LVM0.9, are there other patches? (CVS snapshots are no choice!) Ok, next -> What the heck are you guy's doing? I use a native RH6.2 installation w/o any updates/fixes (except for network security), using 2.2.17 and 2.2.18 kernel-tarballs (the ..17 patches works well on ..18, only a few rejects which can easily inserted by hand;). But you CAN'T release a version that does not work w/o telling users if they had to look at some dependencies! (if there are some, remember i use a really clear RH6.2!) Ok, so please tell me where i can get a release that works on my server, it isn't uncool to me if i had to use an old but STABLE version – but tell the users in all your released files WHICH version IS definitively STABLE. Yes, as you can see, i read the complete ML about this problem, i found reports and patches adressing this, but there's no help. And don't think all your users, who want to use LVM, are able to use CVS snapshots (i never use cvs snapshots on my server – release is release – features against bugs;). Grmpf, ok all my frustration is left out, what can we do? ;) greetings, hackbyte -> hackbyte@gmx.de, IRCNet hackbyte @ #linux.de, +linux.de ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! 2001-01-03 13:13 ` Daniel Mitzlaff @ 2001-01-03 13:55 ` Joe Thornber 2001-01-03 18:24 ` lewis 2001-01-08 16:05 ` Michael J. Declerck 2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Joe Thornber @ 2001-01-03 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-lvm > First, i ran into the same problems as reported before here on the list, > vgmerge and vgextend give me OOPS while extending the LE counter for the > VG. Grab the latest code from the LVM_0-9-patches branch of cvs. You will need to repatch/build the kernel module as well as the userland tools. > other patches? (CVS snapshots are no choice!) Then wait for the next release which shouldn't be too long. > Ok, next -> > What the heck are you guy's doing? I use a native RH6.2 installation w/o > any updates/fixes (except for network security), using 2.2.17 and 2.2.18 > kernel-tarballs (the ..17 patches works well on ..18, only a few rejects > which can easily inserted by hand;). But you CAN'T release a version that > does not work w/o telling users if they had to look at some dependencies! > (if there are some, remember i use a really clear RH6.2!) ??? The lvm-2.2.17 and 2.2.18 patches apply cleanly to the vanilla kernel + rawio. The redhat kernel is almost certainly not a vanilla kernel. > reports and patches adressing this, but there's no help. And don't think > all your users, who want to use LVM, are able to use CVS snapshots (i > never use cvs snapshots on my server � release is release � features > against bugs;). I don't think 0.9 is quite ready for production systems. Maybe you should play with 0.8. - Joe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! 2001-01-03 13:13 ` Daniel Mitzlaff 2001-01-03 13:55 ` Joe Thornber @ 2001-01-03 18:24 ` lewis 2001-01-08 16:05 ` Michael J. Declerck 2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: lewis @ 2001-01-03 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-lvm [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii, Size: 5688 bytes --] On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 01:13:14PM +0000, Daniel Mitzlaff wrote: > First, i ran into the same problems as reported before here on the list, > vgmerge and vgextend give me OOPS while extending the LE counter for the > VG. Joe has responded about this already. > BUT, all my drives are filled up with data, there's NO BACKUP(!), and no > way to take more than a single drive free for reformatting. If this is a production system, you should really should have some backup. There are plenty of things that can go wrong without even putting layers like LVM into the picture. I agree that upgrading LVM should not mess up you're data, but if you have no backup, you are taking a lot of risks no matter what. I do understand that for home systems backup is a difficult issue, but bad things do happen even with the most finely tuned systems. CD burners are a cheap and effective way to backup user data, and hard drives are cheap enough now that you could buy a cheap external drive with large capacity to do backups to. That said, it is very unlikely that you will loose data to LVM. Even the issues that have come up on the list don't cause data corruption. > So, i tried the patches sent by Heinz not really knowing where to patch > it in the lvm-userland, recompiled no change at all. Please, tell me > if it is correct to use the patch at the userland-tools instead of > patching the kernel-parts. And, can you tell me (and others) in which > order we have to see the patch?, plain patch for native LVM0.9, are there > other patches? (CVS snapshots are no choice!) Which patches are you talking about here? > Ok, next -> > What the heck are you guy's doing? I use a native RH6.2 installation w/o > any updates/fixes (except for network security), using 2.2.17 and 2.2.18 > kernel-tarballs (the ..17 patches works well on ..18, only a few rejects > which can easily inserted by hand;). But you CAN'T release a version that > does not work w/o telling users if they had to look at some dependencies! > (if there are some, remember i use a really clear RH6.2!) First of all, if you are using the stock redhat packages, and they don't work with the new LVM stuff, please complain to RedHat. They are the ones that should deal with that. Secondly, what are you talking about? --> "version that does not work" What is this? Are you using the RPMs off the sistina site? Did you compile the packages yourself? If you used the sistina packages, make sure the liblvm* files are removed from /lib. My initial packages installed into /usr/ instead of root. I will get new packages out shortly that correct this problem. I was hoping the transition issue would be resolved before I did this, but it looks like I need to get new packages out first and then deal with that. You can also look at http://distro.conectiva.com.br/experimental/lvm/ for a version of the LVM packages that supports both the old (0.8.x) and the new (0.9.x) interfaces. > Ok, so please tell me where i can get a release that works on my server, > it isn't uncool to me if i had to use an old but STABLE version but > tell the users in all your released files WHICH version IS definitively > STABLE. Define stable. I don't know of any software package that is 100% stable. There are always issues to track down. Point releases, such as LVM 0.9 are especially prone to that. You should know that. If you are concerned about it, don't upgrade immediately. Monitor the linux-lvm and lvm-devel mailing lists and see what problems people have. That's why we archive the mailing lists. > Yes, as you can see, i read the complete ML about this problem, i found > reports and patches adressing this, but there's no help. And don't think > all your users, who want to use LVM, are able to use CVS snapshots (i > never use cvs snapshots on my server release is release features > against bugs;). Good, I'm glad you are reading the ML. We are working on the issues. Heinz has been out of contact for a few weeks due to a move and other issues, which is delaying feedback. Sorry about that. :( > Grmpf, ok all my frustration is left out, what can we do? ;) > greetings, hackbyte -> hackbyte@gmx.de, IRCNet hackbyte @ #linux.de, > +linux.de I understand your frustration, but know that we are working on this. As I said earlier, most point releases have issues that need to be worked out, and LVM 0.9 is no exception. If you want a "stable" release, you should probably use LVM 0.8.1 for now. LVM 0.9.1 should be out soon, which should have all the *known* bugs fixed. Regards, -- AJ Lewis Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951 1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952 Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: lewis@sistina.com http://www.sistina.com Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648 Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys) -----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote---------------------------------------- THE LESSER-KNOWN PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES #16: C- This language was named for the grade received by its creator when he submitted it as a class project in a graduate programming class. C- is best described as a "low-level" programming language. In fact, the language generally requires more C- statements than machine-code statements to execute a given task. In this respect, it is very similar to COBOL. -----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------ [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! 2001-01-03 13:13 ` Daniel Mitzlaff 2001-01-03 13:55 ` Joe Thornber 2001-01-03 18:24 ` lewis @ 2001-01-08 16:05 ` Michael J. Declerck 2001-01-08 17:43 ` Daniel Mitzlaff 2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Michael J. Declerck @ 2001-01-08 16:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-lvm A short parable seems to be in order here. There once was a large penguin rookery located on an island that was designated as K-2.2.18. The penguin population that lived there was large and plentiful due to the fact that it provided suitable protection and sustenance. Due to this the population had grown large and was starting to look for new territory to occupy. Lo and behold they discovered a substantially larger island known as K-2.4.0 which had a wealth of untapped resources that would allow the colony to expand in the future. Unfortunately, the distance between K-2.2.18 and K-2.4.0 was large and full of many unknown dangers (not the least of which were large killer whales looking for tasty penguins to snack on). Despite this, many of the penguin population decided that the risk and effort necessary to reach K-2.4.0 was acceptable because of the opportunities it provided. This divided the penguins into a number of groups: o Group #1 was composed of some of the elder penguins, who had made successful ocean crossings in the past. They traveled together in a flock so as to mitigate their danger. They arrived successfully with only minor injuries. o Group #2 was formed from mature and adolescent penguins. When they ventured forth they either swam in groups for protection or as individuals who counted on their own strengths (speed and cunning) to insure a successful journey. Despite this they still encountered dangerous schools of jellyfish that inflicted damage upon some of them. These penguins required some time to recuperate after completing their journey Group #3 was made up of fledging penguins, who having seen others make the journey, decided they could do so as well. They launched from shore with a plan that consisted of nothing more than a dream of Island K-2.4.0 for they were unexperienced in such endeavors. Many of them became lost during the journey or were eaten by killer whales hunting for the inexperienced. Of the remaining penguins, the majority turned back to K-2.2.18. A few of the original group did make it K-2.4.0 and spent much time recuperating from the exhausting swim and the mental trauma from having seen their friends eaten. Group #4 was all the other penguins left on K-2.2.18. These penguins waited a number of months till the ocean calmed down and the killer whales migrated to warmer waters. A this point the majority of them departed from K-2.2.18 for K-2.4.0 with friendly schools of dolphins to guide them (designated Pod-RedHat, Pod-SuSe, Pod-Sistina, etc...). They arrived without incident on K-2.4.0. Those left on K-2.2.18 maintained the rookery and lived happy ever after. The moral of the story -- If you are a Group #3 penguin don't expect much sympathy from your wiser or more cautious brethren when you get eaten. --- Michael Declerck, declerck@sistina.com +1.510.823.7991 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! 2001-01-08 16:05 ` Michael J. Declerck @ 2001-01-08 17:43 ` Daniel Mitzlaff 2001-01-08 19:24 ` Michael J. Declerck 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Daniel Mitzlaff @ 2001-01-08 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-lvm Answered to Michael "J." Declerck > A short parable seems to be in order here. [skipped a very nice story here... ;)] > The moral of the story -- If you are a Group #3 penguin don't expect > much sympathy from your wiser or more cautious > brethren when you get eaten. *smile* .... ok ... But, what about Penguins which have its own disability's and can't do such a long jorney to reach K-2.4.0 islands? Are they all so outdated, that peoples from K-2.4.0 doesn't have to look for them or in any other way care about them? You don't remember your own basics?;) > --- > Michael Declerck, declerck@sistina.com +1.510.823.7991 Greetings from good old 2.2.18 islands, we are still alive (and will probably not die for the next few years;) hackbyte P.s.: YOU DON'T REMEMBER YOUR PARENTS? GO INTO YOUR ROOM, YOU GOT ARREST FOR 2 WEEKS! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! 2001-01-08 17:43 ` Daniel Mitzlaff @ 2001-01-08 19:24 ` Michael J. Declerck 2001-01-08 21:21 ` Daniel Mitzlaff 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Michael J. Declerck @ 2001-01-08 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-lvm hackbyte@gmx.de said: > *smile* .... ok ... But, what about Penguins which have its own > disability's and can't do such a long jorney to reach K-2.4.0 islands? > Are they all so outdated, that peoples from K-2.4.0 doesn't have to > look for them or in any other way care about them? > You don't remember your own basics?;) I believe that what I said is that those penguins should wait for guidance and help from the dolphin pods when the waters were safe. I didn't say anything about leaving them behind if they wanted to make the journey then. As stated in an earlier post Sistina never said the "crossing conditions with regards to LVM and K-2.4.0 were safe". These are still uncharted waters that we are working quickly to make safe. --- Michael Declerck, declerck@sistina.com +1.510.823.7991 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! 2001-01-08 19:24 ` Michael J. Declerck @ 2001-01-08 21:21 ` Daniel Mitzlaff 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Daniel Mitzlaff @ 2001-01-08 21:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-lvm From Michael Declerck comes: > I believe that what I said is that those penguins should wait for > guidance and help from the dolphin pods when the waters were safe. > I didn't say anything about leaving them behind if they wanted to > make the journey then. Ah, i see. Ok i missunderstand you last mail a little... sorry;) > As stated in an earlier post Sistina never said the "crossing conditions > with regards to LVM and K-2.4.0 were safe". These are still uncharted > waters that we are working quickly to make safe. ;), did you really understand what i mean with my mails? It's nice to me, if i can see how good a software will work. Even if it's alpha or beta software. But, i'd like to know this after reading the manuals, *not* only if i try it myself every time;) And, dont forget, a layer between hdd and fs is ALWAYS ->mission critical<-. Or has to be tested as if it was. (imho) So, in the manual, somewhere should be a small but important message about alpha/beta or full stable status. (At least, linus or whoever maintains the actual tarball needs such information to decide if a patch/update is ok for inclusion in a STABLE kernel!;) regards.... hackbyte aka hackbyte@gmx.de P.s.: I think, even if you use the actual version numbers like 0,2,4,6 for stable and 1,3,5,7 for unstable versions, just let us know, that you do so ;) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-01-08 21:21 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-01-03 17:44 [linux-lvm] Another strange setup by a newbie, but strange oops resulted while trying vgextend/vgmerge! Daniel Mitzlaff
[not found] <hackbyte@gmx.de>
2001-01-03 13:13 ` Daniel Mitzlaff
2001-01-03 13:55 ` Joe Thornber
2001-01-03 18:24 ` lewis
2001-01-08 16:05 ` Michael J. Declerck
2001-01-08 17:43 ` Daniel Mitzlaff
2001-01-08 19:24 ` Michael J. Declerck
2001-01-08 21:21 ` Daniel Mitzlaff
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox