Hi Rafael, Good testing, it confirms that some additional barriers are necessary to prevent undesired behaviours.
I'll test by tomorrow the same procedure at VG level. 2009/7/30 Rafael Micó Miranda <[email protected]> > Hi Brem > > El jue, 30-07-2009 a las 09:15 +0200, brem belguebli escribió: > > Hi, > > > > does it look like we're hiting some "undesired feature" ;-) > > > > Concerning the 0 nodeid, I think I read that on some Redhat documents > > or bugzilla report, I could find it out. > > > > Brem > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Linux-cluster mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster > > I made some test on my lab environment too, i attach the results in the > TXT file. > > My conclusions: > > 1.- lovgols with exclusive flag must be used over clustered volume > groups (obvious and already known) > 2.- logvols activated with exclusive flag must be handled EXCLUSIVELY > with the exclusive flag > > ---> as part of my lvm-cluster.sh resource script, the exclusive flag is > part of the resource definition in cluster.conf so this is correctly > handled > > 3.- you can activate an already active exclusive logvol on any node if > you dont take into accout, during the activation, the exclusive flag > 4.- in use (opened) logvols are protected from deactivation from > secondary nodes, even from main node > 5.- after a node failure (hang-up, fencing...) logvol is not open > anymore, so it can be exclusively activated on a new node > > All this was tested manually, but this is the expected behaviour on > lvm-cluster.sh resource script. > > Link to lvm-cluster.sh resource script: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/cluster-devel/2009-June/msg00020.html > > Cheers, > > Rafael > > -- > Rafael Micó Miranda > > -- > Linux-cluster mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster >
-- Linux-cluster mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
