From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [172.16.48.31]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i3UHhiv12512 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2004 13:43:44 -0400 Received: from p2.imoveinc.com (p2.imoveinc.com [64.1.196.61]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3UHhhKG014928 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2004 13:43:43 -0400 Received: from easystreet.com (w002.z064001196.pdx-or.dsl.cnc.net [64.1.196.2]) by p2.imoveinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 995213CB5 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2004 10:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4092904E.1010101@easystreet.com> Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 10:43:42 -0700 From: Don Buchholz MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM and hardware device re-ordering? References: <409276F4.7060305@easystreet.com> <20040430162957.GA8717@null.msp.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20040430162957.GA8717@null.msp.redhat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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"; format="flowed" To: LVM general discussion and development Thanks, AJ. May I propose this question for inclusion in the LVM HOWTO FAQ chapter? - Don AJ Lewis wrote: >On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 08:55:32AM -0700, Don Buchholz wrote: > > >>The one nagging question in my mind is: >> >> How resilient is LVM to a sudden renumbering of >> physical hard disks? >> >>Assume no disks have actually failed, just that a new disk >>gets added and suddenly all the LVM drives get notched up >>a drive letter. >> >> > >It's fine. Each disk (PV) is labeled with a UUID, which uniquely identifies >it to the system. 'vgscan' identifies this after a new disk is added that >changes your drive numbering. Most distros run vgscan in the lvm startup >scripts to cope with this on reboot after a hardware addition. If you're >doing a hot-add, you'll have to run this by hand I think. OTOH, if your vg >is activated and being used, the renumbering should not affect it at all. >It's only the activation that needs the identifier, and the worst case >scenario is that the activation will fail without a vgscan with a complaint >about a missing PV. > >Regards, > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >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/ >