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 k13K2A102807 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2006 15:02:10 -0500 Received: from swlx167.swmed.edu (swlx167.swmed.edu [199.165.152.167]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k13K28bZ023475 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2006 15:02:08 -0500 Received: from peters.swmed.org ([129.112.118.137]) by swlx167.swmed.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1F5782-0005Gm-4A for linux-lvm@redhat.com; Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:01:58 -0600 Message-ID: <43E3B6B5.5080409@utsouthwestern.edu> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:01:57 -0600 From: Peter Smith MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <43E24A37.6010801@cup.hp.com> In-Reply-To: <43E24A37.6010801@cup.hp.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] vgchange -an question with disconnected disks 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 John DeFranco wrote: > I have a question regarding the behavior of vgchange -a n on lvm2 when > there are disk failures. Specifically the following: > > 1. vgchange -a y vg00 > 2. disconnect the disks > 3. vgchange -a n vg00 Are you doing this in the correct order? Shouldn't you _de_activate the VG _before_ removing the disks? And besides, shouldn't you remove the offending disks from the VG _before_ deactivating and then removing the disks physically? Or at least something equivalent. 1. vgreduce vg00 2. vgchange -a n vg00 3. disconnect the disks 4. vgchange -a y vg00 ... Peter