From: Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@redhat.com>
To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
Cc: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Missing error handling in lv_snapshot_remove
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 11:41:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5202164B.5010302@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <520211BB.2040301@pse-consulting.de>
Dne 7.8.2013 11:22, Andreas Pflug napsal(a):
> Am 06.08.13 19:37, schrieb Bastian Blank:
>> Hi
>>
>> I tried to tackle a particular bug that shows up in Debian for some time
>> now. Some blamed the udev rules and I still can't completely rule them
>> out. But this triggers a much worse bug in the error cleanup of the
>> snapshot remove. I reproduced this with Debian/Linux 3.2.46/LVM 2.02.99
>> without udevd running and Fedora 19/LVM 2.02.98-10.fc19.
>>
>> On snapshot removal, LVM first converts the device into a regular LV
>> (lv_remove_snapshot) and in a second step removes this LV
>> (lv_remove_single). Is there a reason for this two step removal? An
>> error during removal leaves a non-snapshot LV behind.
> Ah, this explains why sometimes my backup stops: I take a snapshot,
> rsync the stuff and remove the snapshot with a daily cron job, but I
> observed twice that a non-snapshot volume named like a backup snapshot
> was lingering around, preventing the script to work. So this is no
> exotic corner case, but happens in real life.
>
> I observe this since I dist-upgraded to wheezy.
>
Because Debian is using non-upstream udev rules.
With upstream udev rules with standard real-life use, this situation
cannot happen - since these rules are constructed to play better with
udev WATCH rule.
Zdenek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-07 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-06 17:37 [linux-lvm] Missing error handling in lv_snapshot_remove Bastian Blank
2013-08-07 9:13 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2013-08-07 12:36 ` Bastian Blank
2013-08-07 13:32 ` Alasdair G Kergon
2013-08-07 15:13 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2013-08-08 13:33 ` Ritesh Raj Sarraf
2013-08-09 9:50 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2013-08-07 9:22 ` Andreas Pflug
2013-08-07 9:41 ` Zdenek Kabelac [this message]
2013-08-07 17:18 ` Andreas Pflug
2013-08-08 10:01 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2013-08-09 7:57 ` Andreas Pflug
2013-08-09 9:40 ` Zdenek Kabelac
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5202164B.5010302@redhat.com \
--to=zkabelac@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-lvm@redhat.com \
--cc=pgadmin@pse-consulting.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).