From: Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com>
To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] auto_activation_volume_list in lvm.conf not honored
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 10:30:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <729f6285-1b10-c8cc-1a07-2441414da7ba@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <kcim.5838018e.2209.36b950052698aabe@ucs.cubewerk.intern>
Dne 25.11.2016 v 10:17 Stefan Bauer napsal(a):
> Hi Peter,
>
> as i said, we have master/slave setup _without_ concurrent write/read. So i do not see a reason why i should take care of locking as only one node is activating the volume group at the same time.
>
> That should be fine - right?
Nope it's not.
Every i.e. activation DOES validation of all resources and takes ACTION when
something is wrong.
Sorry, but there is NO way to do this properly without locking manager.
Although many lvm2 users always do try to be 'innovative' and try to use in
lock-less way - this seems to work most of the time - till the moment some
disaster happens - then just lvm2 is blamed about data loss..
Interestingly they never tried to think why we invested so much time into
locking manager when there is such 'easy-fix' in their eyes...
IMHO lvmlockd is relatively 'low-resource/overhead' solution worth to be
explored if you don't like clvmd...
Regards
Zdenek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-25 9:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-25 9:17 [linux-lvm] auto_activation_volume_list in lvm.conf not honored Stefan Bauer
2016-11-25 9:30 ` Zdenek Kabelac [this message]
2016-11-28 22:24 ` David Teigland
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-12-02 7:07 Stefan Bauer
2016-11-24 14:20 Stefan Bauer
2016-11-24 14:02 Stefan Bauer
2016-11-25 8:48 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2016-11-24 12:21 Stefan Bauer
2016-11-24 13:38 ` Peter Rajnoha
2016-11-24 13:55 ` Peter Rajnoha
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=729f6285-1b10-c8cc-1a07-2441414da7ba@gmail.com \
--to=zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-lvm@redhat.com \
/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).