* [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
@ 2011-09-18 13:58 Gijs
2011-09-19 0:21 ` Stuart D. Gathman
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Gijs @ 2011-09-18 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
Dear List,
After I ran into some trouble with my raid setup, I managed to get it
online again, but somehow LVM won't activate the physical volume that
was on it. Well, to be exact, it will activate the PV, but not all the
LVs on it. It activates two of the three LVs.
When I type in "lvchange -a y /dev/raid-5/data" to activate the
remaining LV, it returns the following errors:
device-mapper: resume ioctl failed: Invalid argument Unable to resume
raid--5-data (253:2)
Checking dmesg, it says the following:
device-mapper: table: 253:2: md127 too small for target:
start=5897914368, len=1908400128, dev_size=7806312448
I pretty much tried everything and as a last resort I typed in the
following:
pvresize -v --setphysicalvolumesize 3996831973376B /dev/md127
Where 3996831973376 is the exact amount of bytes available on the raid
array. However, this gave me the following info:
Using physical volume(s) on command line
Archiving volume group "raid-5" metadata (seqno 21).
/dev/md127: Pretending size is 7806312448 not 7806314496 sectors.
Resizing physical volume /dev/md127 from 952919 to 952918 extents.
/dev/md127: cannot resize to 952918 extents as later ones are allocated.
0 physical volume(s) resized / 1 physical volume(s) not resized
Now I wonder why LVM wants to pretend it has more space than it actually
has. Because when I subtract those sectors from each other, and I
calculate how much bytes are in those "pretended sectors", it turns out
that that's the exact amount that is missing (1MB).
I'm running Fedora 15 from a rescue USB-stick at the moment, but the
system itself was formatted/configured under Fedora 14. Could that be
the cause of the problem? If not, what other options do I have to fix
this? (without loosing the data on the volume)
Kind regards,
Gijs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-18 13:58 [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has Gijs
@ 2011-09-19 0:21 ` Stuart D. Gathman
2011-09-19 17:40 ` Gijs
2011-09-19 1:13 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
2011-09-19 1:23 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
2 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Stuart D. Gathman @ 2011-09-19 0:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LVM general discussion and development
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Gijs wrote:
> Now I wonder why LVM wants to pretend it has more space than it actually has.
> Because when I subtract those sectors from each other, and I calculate how
> much bytes are in those "pretended sectors", it turns out that that's the
> exact amount that is missing (1MB).
This may not be related, but I had a problem with blockdev --getsize in Fedora
14 returning the wrong size for an IDE drive on a USB-IDE/SATA adapter. It
returned the correct size for SATA drives on the USB adapter, and for IDE
drives connected to the internal IDE port. So I chalked this up to wierdness
on the (nearly obsolete) USB/IDE interface. But your problem suddenly made me
not so sure.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-18 13:58 [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has Gijs
2011-09-19 0:21 ` Stuart D. Gathman
@ 2011-09-19 1:13 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
2011-09-19 1:23 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
2 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: adultsitesoftware@gmail.com @ 2011-09-19 1:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LVM general discussion and development
Without grepping the source for "pretending" I'd bet the reason the PV is 1MB smaller than the device is on is due to the 1MB used for metadata. You could recreate the PV with no metadata on it if you think that's what you did before.
However, are you 100% sure that you didn't previously use the RAID arryay as the PV? If you swapped the two layers, mdadm and lvm, that what cause exactly the sumption you are presenting - the PV being 1MB smaller than the RAID.
Gijs <info@bsnw.nl> wrote:
>Dear List,
>
>After I ran into some trouble with my raid setup, I managed to get it
>online again, but somehow LVM won't activate the physical volume that
>was on it. Well, to be exact, it will activate the PV, but not all the
>LVs on it. It activates two of the three LVs.
>
>When I type in "lvchange -a y /dev/raid-5/data" to activate the
>remaining LV, it returns the following errors:
>device-mapper: resume ioctl failed: Invalid argument Unable to resume
>raid--5-data (253:2)
>
>Checking dmesg, it says the following:
>device-mapper: table: 253:2: md127 too small for target:
>start=5897914368, len=1908400128, dev_size=7806312448
>
>I pretty much tried everything and as a last resort I typed in the
>following:
>pvresize -v --setphysicalvolumesize 3996831973376B /dev/md127
>Where 3996831973376 is the exact amount of bytes available on the raid
>array. However, this gave me the following info:
>Using physical volume(s) on command line
>Archiving volume group "raid-5" metadata (seqno 21).
>/dev/md127: Pretending size is 7806312448 not 7806314496 sectors.
>Resizing physical volume /dev/md127 from 952919 to 952918 extents.
>/dev/md127: cannot resize to 952918 extents as later ones are
>allocated.
>0 physical volume(s) resized / 1 physical volume(s) not resized
>
>Now I wonder why LVM wants to pretend it has more space than it
>actually
>has. Because when I subtract those sectors from each other, and I
>calculate how much bytes are in those "pretended sectors", it turns out
>
>that that's the exact amount that is missing (1MB).
>
>I'm running Fedora 15 from a rescue USB-stick at the moment, but the
>system itself was formatted/configured under Fedora 14. Could that be
>the cause of the problem? If not, what other options do I have to fix
>this? (without loosing the data on the volume)
>
>Kind regards,
>
>Gijs
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-18 13:58 [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has Gijs
2011-09-19 0:21 ` Stuart D. Gathman
2011-09-19 1:13 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
@ 2011-09-19 1:23 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
2011-09-19 17:37 ` Gijs
2 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: adultsitesoftware@gmail.com @ 2011-09-19 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LVM general discussion and development
The PV is 1MB smaller than the device it's on due to the metadata.
The symptoms you are presenting is exactly what would happen if someone had previously set up the RAID and LVM in the typical fashion, with LVM atop RAID, then you tried to activate them in reverse order.
If.you value your data, backup the block devices before proceeding.
Gijs <info@bsnw.nl> wrote:
>Dear List,
>
>After I ran into some trouble with my raid setup, I managed to get it
>online again, but somehow LVM won't activate the physical volume that
>was on it. Well, to be exact, it will activate the PV, but not all the
>LVs on it. It activates two of the three LVs.
>
>When I type in "lvchange -a y /dev/raid-5/data" to activate the
>remaining LV, it returns the following errors:
>device-mapper: resume ioctl failed: Invalid argument Unable to resume
>raid--5-data (253:2)
>
>Checking dmesg, it says the following:
>device-mapper: table: 253:2: md127 too small for target:
>start=5897914368, len=1908400128, dev_size=7806312448
>
>I pretty much tried everything and as a last resort I typed in the
>following:
>pvresize -v --setphysicalvolumesize 3996831973376B /dev/md127
>Where 3996831973376 is the exact amount of bytes available on the raid
>array. However, this gave me the following info:
>Using physical volume(s) on command line
>Archiving volume group "raid-5" metadata (seqno 21).
>/dev/md127: Pretending size is 7806312448 not 7806314496 sectors.
>Resizing physical volume /dev/md127 from 952919 to 952918 extents.
>/dev/md127: cannot resize to 952918 extents as later ones are
>allocated.
>0 physical volume(s) resized / 1 physical volume(s) not resized
>
>Now I wonder why LVM wants to pretend it has more space than it
>actually
>has. Because when I subtract those sectors from each other, and I
>calculate how much bytes are in those "pretended sectors", it turns out
>
>that that's the exact amount that is missing (1MB).
>
>I'm running Fedora 15 from a rescue USB-stick at the moment, but the
>system itself was formatted/configured under Fedora 14. Could that be
>the cause of the problem? If not, what other options do I have to fix
>this? (without loosing the data on the volume)
>
>Kind regards,
>
>Gijs
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-19 1:23 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
@ 2011-09-19 17:37 ` Gijs
2011-09-19 18:48 ` Ray Morris
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Gijs @ 2011-09-19 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LVM general discussion and development
Thank you for your response, however I don't quite understand what you
mean by activating them in reverse order. Activating the PV before the
raid system should be impossible right? And shouldn't activating them in
the right order solve the problem? Or am I missing something here?
On 19-9-2011 3:23, adultsitesoftware@gmail.com wrote:
> The PV is 1MB smaller than the device it's on due to the metadata.
>
> The symptoms you are presenting is exactly what would happen if someone had previously set up the RAID and LVM in the typical fashion, with LVM atop RAID, then you tried to activate them in reverse order.
>
> If.you value your data, backup the block devices before proceeding.
>
> Gijs<info@bsnw.nl> wrote:
>
>> Dear List,
>>
>> After I ran into some trouble with my raid setup, I managed to get it
>> online again, but somehow LVM won't activate the physical volume that
>> was on it. Well, to be exact, it will activate the PV, but not all the
>> LVs on it. It activates two of the three LVs.
>>
>> When I type in "lvchange -a y /dev/raid-5/data" to activate the
>> remaining LV, it returns the following errors:
>> device-mapper: resume ioctl failed: Invalid argument Unable to resume
>> raid--5-data (253:2)
>>
>> Checking dmesg, it says the following:
>> device-mapper: table: 253:2: md127 too small for target:
>> start=5897914368, len=1908400128, dev_size=7806312448
>>
>> I pretty much tried everything and as a last resort I typed in the
>> following:
>> pvresize -v --setphysicalvolumesize 3996831973376B /dev/md127
>> Where 3996831973376 is the exact amount of bytes available on the raid
>> array. However, this gave me the following info:
>> Using physical volume(s) on command line
>> Archiving volume group "raid-5" metadata (seqno 21).
>> /dev/md127: Pretending size is 7806312448 not 7806314496 sectors.
>> Resizing physical volume /dev/md127 from 952919 to 952918 extents.
>> /dev/md127: cannot resize to 952918 extents as later ones are
>> allocated.
>> 0 physical volume(s) resized / 1 physical volume(s) not resized
>>
>> Now I wonder why LVM wants to pretend it has more space than it
>> actually
>> has. Because when I subtract those sectors from each other, and I
>> calculate how much bytes are in those "pretended sectors", it turns out
>>
>> that that's the exact amount that is missing (1MB).
>>
>> I'm running Fedora 15 from a rescue USB-stick at the moment, but the
>> system itself was formatted/configured under Fedora 14. Could that be
>> the cause of the problem? If not, what other options do I have to fix
>> this? (without loosing the data on the volume)
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Gijs
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-19 0:21 ` Stuart D. Gathman
@ 2011-09-19 17:40 ` Gijs
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Gijs @ 2011-09-19 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LVM general discussion and development
Thanks for the reply, however I don't think the size of the blockdev
command is incorrect. At least not on my machine. I had already checked
that earlier and it looked fine.
On 19-9-2011 2:21, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
> This may not be related, but I had a problem with blockdev --getsize
> in Fedora
> 14 returning the wrong size for an IDE drive on a USB-IDE/SATA
> adapter. It
> returned the correct size for SATA drives on the USB adapter, and for IDE
> drives connected to the internal IDE port. So I chalked this up to
> wierdness
> on the (nearly obsolete) USB/IDE interface. But your problem suddenly
> made me
> not so sure.
>
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Gijs wrote:
>
>> Now I wonder why LVM wants to pretend it has more space than it
>> actually has. Because when I subtract those sectors from each other,
>> and I calculate how much bytes are in those "pretended sectors", it
>> turns out that that's the exact amount that is missing (1MB).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-19 17:37 ` Gijs
@ 2011-09-19 18:48 ` Ray Morris
2011-09-19 19:48 ` Gijs
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Ray Morris @ 2011-09-19 18:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
The symptoms you are presenting, the "missing" 1MB are similar
to if someone did this in the past:
mdadm --create /dev/md1 /dev/sd[ab]1
pvcreate /dev/md1
Then later someone did this:
mdadm --assemble /dev/md1 /dev/volgroup/firstLV
The VG, or the reported size of the PV, is 1MB smaller than
the device the PV is on, due to the metadata. If the RAID array,
or rather any raid array, were created on /dev/sda1, for
example, but then later activated using /dev/volgroup/LV,
mdadm would report that the device was 1MB too small, which is
exactly the message you are getting.
--
Ray Morris
support@bettercgi.com
Strongbox - The next generation in site security:
http://www.bettercgi.com/strongbox/
Throttlebox - Intelligent Bandwidth Control
http://www.bettercgi.com/throttlebox/
Strongbox / Throttlebox affiliate program:
http://www.bettercgi.com/affiliates/user/register.php
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 19:37:49 +0200
Gijs <info@bsnw.nl> wrote:
> Thank you for your response, however I don't quite understand what
> you mean by activating them in reverse order. Activating the PV
> before the raid system should be impossible right? And shouldn't
> activating them in the right order solve the problem? Or am I missing
> something here?
>
> On 19-9-2011 3:23, adultsitesoftware@gmail.com wrote:
> > The PV is 1MB smaller than the device it's on due to the metadata.
> >
> > The symptoms you are presenting is exactly what would happen if
> > someone had previously set up the RAID and LVM in the typical
> > fashion, with LVM atop RAID, then you tried to activate them in
> > reverse order.
> >
> > If.you value your data, backup the block devices before proceeding.
> >
> > Gijs<info@bsnw.nl> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear List,
> >>
> >> After I ran into some trouble with my raid setup, I managed to get
> >> it online again, but somehow LVM won't activate the physical
> >> volume that was on it. Well, to be exact, it will activate the PV,
> >> but not all the LVs on it. It activates two of the three LVs.
> >>
> >> When I type in "lvchange -a y /dev/raid-5/data" to activate the
> >> remaining LV, it returns the following errors:
> >> device-mapper: resume ioctl failed: Invalid argument Unable to
> >> resume raid--5-data (253:2)
> >>
> >> Checking dmesg, it says the following:
> >> device-mapper: table: 253:2: md127 too small for target:
> >> start=5897914368, len=1908400128, dev_size=7806312448
> >>
> >> I pretty much tried everything and as a last resort I typed in the
> >> following:
> >> pvresize -v --setphysicalvolumesize 3996831973376B /dev/md127
> >> Where 3996831973376 is the exact amount of bytes available on the
> >> raid array. However, this gave me the following info:
> >> Using physical volume(s) on command line
> >> Archiving volume group "raid-5" metadata (seqno 21).
> >> /dev/md127: Pretending size is 7806312448 not 7806314496 sectors.
> >> Resizing physical volume /dev/md127 from 952919 to 952918 extents.
> >> /dev/md127: cannot resize to 952918 extents as later ones are
> >> allocated.
> >> 0 physical volume(s) resized / 1 physical volume(s) not resized
> >>
> >> Now I wonder why LVM wants to pretend it has more space than it
> >> actually
> >> has. Because when I subtract those sectors from each other, and I
> >> calculate how much bytes are in those "pretended sectors", it
> >> turns out
> >>
> >> that that's the exact amount that is missing (1MB).
> >>
> >> I'm running Fedora 15 from a rescue USB-stick at the moment, but
> >> the system itself was formatted/configured under Fedora 14. Could
> >> that be the cause of the problem? If not, what other options do I
> >> have to fix this? (without loosing the data on the volume)
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Gijs
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-19 18:48 ` Ray Morris
@ 2011-09-19 19:48 ` Gijs
2011-09-19 20:41 ` Ray Morris
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Gijs @ 2011-09-19 19:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LVM general discussion and development
Ah like that. Ok, I can't imagine I typed such a command, but I guess I
can never really know. But let's say I did, would it be possible to
somehow retrieve the data from that volume? By increasing the underlying
raid-5 maybe? Or is it forever lost?
On 19-9-2011 20:48, Ray Morris wrote:
> The symptoms you are presenting, the "missing" 1MB are similar
> to if someone did this in the past:
>
> mdadm --create /dev/md1 /dev/sd[ab]1
> pvcreate /dev/md1
>
> Then later someone did this:
> mdadm --assemble /dev/md1 /dev/volgroup/firstLV
>
> The VG, or the reported size of the PV, is 1MB smaller than
> the device the PV is on, due to the metadata. If the RAID array,
> or rather any raid array, were created on /dev/sda1, for
> example, but then later activated using /dev/volgroup/LV,
> mdadm would report that the device was 1MB too small, which is
> exactly the message you are getting.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-19 19:48 ` Gijs
@ 2011-09-19 20:41 ` Ray Morris
2011-09-21 18:32 ` Gijs
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Ray Morris @ 2011-09-19 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
First, if at all possible make a copy of the underlying block
device using dd or dd_rescue. Very often the most severe damage
is done during the attempt at recovery.
Then let's find the oldest back up copies on the LVM meta data to
see if we can verify how things were set up when they were working.
This will find metadata over 50 days old:
find /etc/lvm/archive -mtime +50
mainly what we're looking for is to see if any mdadm RAID devices
were used as PVs at some point.
Next try mdadm --assemble --readonly --assume-clean /dev/sdFOO to see
if you can assemble an array using the lower level device (which is
also marked as a PV right now). If it assembles, do:
pvdisplay -m /dev/md0
to see if it's a PV, and check to see if it has a filesystem.
Based on the messages you got, it looks like /dev/md0 at one point
was the PV, rather than being assembled from LVs.
--
Ray Morris
support@bettercgi.com
Strongbox - The next generation in site security:
http://www.bettercgi.com/strongbox/
Throttlebox - Intelligent Bandwidth Control
http://www.bettercgi.com/throttlebox/
Strongbox / Throttlebox affiliate program:
http://www.bettercgi.com/affiliates/user/register.php
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:48:15 +0200
Gijs <info@bsnw.nl> wrote:
> Ah like that. Ok, I can't imagine I typed such a command, but I guess
> I can never really know. But let's say I did, would it be possible to
> somehow retrieve the data from that volume? By increasing the
> underlying raid-5 maybe? Or is it forever lost?
>
> On 19-9-2011 20:48, Ray Morris wrote:
> > The symptoms you are presenting, the "missing" 1MB are similar
> > to if someone did this in the past:
> >
> > mdadm --create /dev/md1 /dev/sd[ab]1
> > pvcreate /dev/md1
> >
> > Then later someone did this:
> > mdadm --assemble /dev/md1 /dev/volgroup/firstLV
> >
> > The VG, or the reported size of the PV, is 1MB smaller than
> > the device the PV is on, due to the metadata. If the RAID array,
> > or rather any raid array, were created on /dev/sda1, for
> > example, but then later activated using /dev/volgroup/LV,
> > mdadm would report that the device was 1MB too small, which is
> > exactly the message you are getting.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-19 20:41 ` Ray Morris
@ 2011-09-21 18:32 ` Gijs
2011-10-12 20:43 ` Gijs
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Gijs @ 2011-09-21 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LVM general discussion and development
Unfortunately I can't find all the old LVM configs that the system used.
I was in the process of moving my root filesystem to the raid-5 array.
Since I needed the root to be unmounted for that, I used a FC15
USB-bootable rescue system to do the copying of the root to the raid-5
array. And that's when things went wrong. Since the rescue system is
pretty much run from memory, I don't have the LVM configs that were
created when I was using the rescue system. I do have older configs that
were created when I was creating the raid-5 array on the system itself,
but those don't show anything wrong from what I can see. (and I guess
that's correct, since nothing was wrong at that time)
I tried assembling/recreating an array on the PV-device, but that just
gave me the error "mdadm: no raid-devices specified." So I can't really
find an array on the LVM devices either.
Some info I got from the PV:
[root@poseidon ~]# pvdisplay -m /dev/md127
--- Physical volume ---
PV Name /dev/md127
VG Name raid-5
PV Size 3.64 TiB / not usable 0
Allocatable yes
PE Size 4.00 MiB
Total PE 952919
Free PE 5252
Allocated PE 947667
PV UUID ZmJtA4-cZBL-kuXT-53Ie-7o1C-7oro-uw5GB6
--- Physical Segments ---
Physical extent 0 to 714687:
Logical volume /dev/raid-5/data
Logical extents 0 to 714687
Physical extent 714688 to 714933:
FREE
Physical extent 714934 to 714953:
Logical volume /dev/raid-5/data
Logical extents 947647 to 947666
Physical extent 714954 to 719959:
FREE
Physical extent 719960 to 952918:
Logical volume /dev/raid-5/data
Logical extents 714688 to 947646
The empty spaces inbetween are from LVs there were created before. And
the 3rd segment is from when I tried to resize the data-LV to see if
that made any difference. It obviously didn't since it was the PV that
was actually too small, not the LV, which I figured out later.
From what you say, it indeed sounds like I messed up some command that
caused an array to be created on an LV, but I can't really find any
evidence that I really did that. Is there any other explanation that LVM
is acting this way? Is it perhaps possible to tell LVM to run of the
configuration stored in /etc/lvm, instead of the metadata embedded on
the PV?
There's also something that I don't understand. Why is it just the
data-LV? I had a swap and root LV as well, and those activated just
fine. Why would LVM have trouble activating the data-LV when it had no
trouble activating the swap/root-LV?
On 19-9-2011 22:41, Ray Morris wrote:
> First, if at all possible make a copy of the underlying block
> device using dd or dd_rescue. Very often the most severe damage
> is done during the attempt at recovery.
>
> Then let's find the oldest back up copies on the LVM meta data to
> see if we can verify how things were set up when they were working.
> This will find metadata over 50 days old:
>
> find /etc/lvm/archive -mtime +50
>
> mainly what we're looking for is to see if any mdadm RAID devices
> were used as PVs at some point.
>
> Next try mdadm --assemble --readonly --assume-clean /dev/sdFOO to see
> if you can assemble an array using the lower level device (which is
> also marked as a PV right now). If it assembles, do:
> pvdisplay -m /dev/md0
> to see if it's a PV, and check to see if it has a filesystem.
>
> Based on the messages you got, it looks like /dev/md0 at one point
> was the PV, rather than being assembled from LVs.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has
2011-09-21 18:32 ` Gijs
@ 2011-10-12 20:43 ` Gijs
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Gijs @ 2011-10-12 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LVM general discussion and development
I managed to get all my data back by deleting the LVM volumes and
recreating it without formatting the drives. I did have to run fsck on
my data volume, but all data was intact as far as I could see.
And I also think I know what went wrong. Pretty much every reboot my
raid-1 (for /boot) and my raid-5 MD-devices switch places with each
other. So sometimes it's /dev/md126, the other times it's /dev/md127. I
must have used the wrong device after a reboot, mistakenly thinking it
was the LVM or boot partition.
On 21-9-2011 20:32, Gijs wrote:
> Unfortunately I can't find all the old LVM configs that the system
> used. I was in the process of moving my root filesystem to the raid-5
> array. Since I needed the root to be unmounted for that, I used a FC15
> USB-bootable rescue system to do the copying of the root to the raid-5
> array. And that's when things went wrong. Since the rescue system is
> pretty much run from memory, I don't have the LVM configs that were
> created when I was using the rescue system. I do have older configs
> that were created when I was creating the raid-5 array on the system
> itself, but those don't show anything wrong from what I can see. (and
> I guess that's correct, since nothing was wrong at that time)
>
> I tried assembling/recreating an array on the PV-device, but that just
> gave me the error "mdadm: no raid-devices specified." So I can't
> really find an array on the LVM devices either.
>
> Some info I got from the PV:
> [root@poseidon ~]# pvdisplay -m /dev/md127
> --- Physical volume ---
> PV Name /dev/md127
> VG Name raid-5
> PV Size 3.64 TiB / not usable 0
> Allocatable yes
> PE Size 4.00 MiB
> Total PE 952919
> Free PE 5252
> Allocated PE 947667
> PV UUID ZmJtA4-cZBL-kuXT-53Ie-7o1C-7oro-uw5GB6
>
> --- Physical Segments ---
> Physical extent 0 to 714687:
> Logical volume /dev/raid-5/data
> Logical extents 0 to 714687
> Physical extent 714688 to 714933:
> FREE
> Physical extent 714934 to 714953:
> Logical volume /dev/raid-5/data
> Logical extents 947647 to 947666
> Physical extent 714954 to 719959:
> FREE
> Physical extent 719960 to 952918:
> Logical volume /dev/raid-5/data
> Logical extents 714688 to 947646
>
> The empty spaces inbetween are from LVs there were created before. And
> the 3rd segment is from when I tried to resize the data-LV to see if
> that made any difference. It obviously didn't since it was the PV that
> was actually too small, not the LV, which I figured out later.
>
> From what you say, it indeed sounds like I messed up some command that
> caused an array to be created on an LV, but I can't really find any
> evidence that I really did that. Is there any other explanation that
> LVM is acting this way? Is it perhaps possible to tell LVM to run of
> the configuration stored in /etc/lvm, instead of the metadata embedded
> on the PV?
>
> There's also something that I don't understand. Why is it just the
> data-LV? I had a swap and root LV as well, and those activated just
> fine. Why would LVM have trouble activating the data-LV when it had no
> trouble activating the swap/root-LV?
>
> On 19-9-2011 22:41, Ray Morris wrote:
>> First, if at all possible make a copy of the underlying block
>> device using dd or dd_rescue. Very often the most severe damage
>> is done during the attempt at recovery.
>>
>> Then let's find the oldest back up copies on the LVM meta data to
>> see if we can verify how things were set up when they were working.
>> This will find metadata over 50 days old:
>>
>> find /etc/lvm/archive -mtime +50
>>
>> mainly what we're looking for is to see if any mdadm RAID devices
>> were used as PVs at some point.
>>
>> Next try mdadm --assemble --readonly --assume-clean /dev/sdFOO to see
>> if you can assemble an array using the lower level device (which is
>> also marked as a PV right now). If it assembles, do:
>> pvdisplay -m /dev/md0
>> to see if it's a PV, and check to see if it has a filesystem.
>>
>> Based on the messages you got, it looks like /dev/md0 at one point
>> was the PV, rather than being assembled from LVs.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-10-12 20:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-09-18 13:58 [linux-lvm] LVM pretends it has more space than it actually has Gijs
2011-09-19 0:21 ` Stuart D. Gathman
2011-09-19 17:40 ` Gijs
2011-09-19 1:13 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
2011-09-19 1:23 ` adultsitesoftware@gmail.com
2011-09-19 17:37 ` Gijs
2011-09-19 18:48 ` Ray Morris
2011-09-19 19:48 ` Gijs
2011-09-19 20:41 ` Ray Morris
2011-09-21 18:32 ` Gijs
2011-10-12 20:43 ` Gijs
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).