From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <457FC11B.3090105@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:00:11 +0000 From: Patrick Caulfield MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM2 and OCFS2 References: In-Reply-To: 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" To: Boris Ostrovsky Cc: linux-lvm@redhat.com Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > (Resending with cc: fixed) > >> It's true that lvm is not cluster-aware. What that means is that if >> you update the >> volume groups on one node then the other nodes in the cluster will not >> see the >> changes and you could end up with the block devices on the machines >> dangerously >> out of sync. > > What if I can guarantee that other nodes will not access LVM metadata > (i.e. they will not issue any LVM command) until I run 'vgchange -ay' > on them? The only access that those other nodes will have to volumes > is that they will have some of them mounted. > > Is this still dangerous? My (limited) understanding of metadata is > that it is stored in the first few blocks of a disk (or striped, if > necessary) and is cached in lvm.cache. vgchange will sync disk and > cache, so it should be OK, right? Yes, that should work. Just be VERY, VERY careful! patrick