From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20000927105531.00eb8d30@laplaza.org> Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 10:55:31 -0600 From: Mats Wichmann Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] lv not persistent across reboot? In-Reply-To: <20000927144714.A21932@srv.t-online.de> References: <20000926113521.C17132@srv.t-online.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-linux-lvm Errors-To: owner-linux-lvm List-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-lvm@msede.com At 02:47 PM 09/27/2000 +0000, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote: > >Morning Steve :-{) > >On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 07:19:14AM -0500, Steve Brueggeman wrote: >> Does this imply that Linux LVM will also have problems with discs in H.A. >> configurations? > >Yes. > >> >> For example: Fibre Channel drives have two ports on them. If I have a Linux box >> with two Host Adapters, and each adapter is connected to the same set of drives, >> but on different ports, will v0.8final (without the patch below) have unstable >> vgscans? > >Yes, it should. > >> >> I have not been following the high availability mailing list, and a solution may >> already exist there. If so, and you know how, I'd be interested in a quick >> description. > >Not that i am aware of. Does anybody have any experience to contribute about what other LVM systems do in these situations? They don't have the dynamic scan/assignment stuff in Solaris or AIX, right? (Showing my ignorance here). My experience of FC-AL setups is limited to theoretical at this point, but I had been wondering how they are addressed by systems. Is the dual-port stuff handled within the driver such that it's not actually presented as two separate "devices"? The presence of two ports is a redundancy (+optionally performance) issue, so that would almost make sense to me that one would hide the physical reality inside the driver. -- mats