On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 6:40 AM, David Morton <davidmorto...@gmail.com> wrote: > We're changing our SAN shortly and I'm putting together the procedure / > config now for the shared storage. This will be based on XFS on top of > clustered LVM2 via Pacemaker. > > I've implemented the exclusive=yes directive on the LVM resources (volume > groups) but I am still able to mount on both cluster nodes (2 node cluster) > in my testing environment. I would have thought that this directive would > prevent multiple mounting / VG activation given that even when there are no > cluster comms (this is how i create the split brain, and reboot both nodes) > the storage is available to both nodes ? > > What is the recommended way of guaranteeing storage exclusiveness in this > (albeit unlikely) situation where both nodes think they are running by > themselves ? I've looked at sdb and sfex but have previously been steered > away from them.
Perhaps look at the Red Hat OCF agent for LVM (yes, Pacemaker can use those too :-) I believe they implemented the exclusivity requirements you're after. I believe the existing Linux-HA OCF LVM agent relies on Pacemaker to enforce the "active on only one location" property. > > Dave > > _______________________________________________ > Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org > _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
