[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to "exclusive"
Launchpad has imported 11 comments from the remote bug at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517900. If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking. On 2009-08-17T18:45:15+00:00 Brem wrote: Description of problem: vgchange -a y bypasses exclusive vg/lv locks if any Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):5.3 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. activate exclusively a clustered VG on node 1 (vgchange -a ey VGXX) 2. on node 2, vgchange -a ey VGXX exits in error complaining about a lock (normal) 3. on node 2, vgchange -a y VGXX succeeds even if node 1 holds the exclusive lock Actual results: 2. is OK, it fails 3. is permissive Expected results: 3. should fail Additional info: Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/719333/comments/0 On 2009-09-26T18:20:22+00:00 Brem wrote: Hello, Any update on this case, will it be studied ? Regards Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/719333/comments/1 On 2009-09-26T22:07:45+00:00 Alasdair wrote: But does (3) actually activate the LV on node 2 or not? (Run 'dmsetup info -c' on each machine.) What 'vgchange -ay VGXX' means is 'activate all the LVs in VGXX on every node in the cluster taking account of any restrictions defined in local lvm configuration files on each node'. (Run 'lvm dumpconfig' on each machine.) Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/719333/comments/2 On 2009-09-26T23:04:56+00:00 Brem wrote: Yes it does. I understand your point of view, but it looks more like a permissive behaviour than a normal and desired one (my own opinion). All the cluster nodes are setup with cluster locking (locking_type=3). >From my understanding (and experience from other platforms), vgchange -a y should not be allowed unless the lock holding node has released it (prior vgchange -a en VGXXX one node1 then vgchange -a y one node2 [or node1] to make it active on all nodes). Or if the holding node is dead. Wouldn't that be safer ? I always tend to imagine the unaware admin that gets on a cluster node on which the VG is not active (held exclusively by another node) and thinking he's doing the right thing activates (vgchange -a y) the VG, and then mounts the FS. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/719333/comments/3 On 2009-09-30T12:18:19+00:00 Brem wrote: Hello, Can we expect something to be done about that or do you just consider it pointless? I know you guys are doing a lot of improvements on LVM, and I'm not expecting a fix/enhancement asap, I just need to know if it gets considered and planned, at what term one should expect it to be done. Regards. Brem Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/719333/comments/4 On 2009-09-30T16:27:35+00:00 Christine wrote: I have managed to reproduce this on a two node cluster. One node: [root@fanny ~]# vgchange -aey guest On another: [root@anna ~]# vgchange -ay guest Error locking on node anna: Volume is busy on another node Error locking on node anna: Volume is busy on another node Error locking on node anna: Volume is busy on another node 1 logical volume(s) in volume group "guest" now active so ONE volume gets activated and the others don't. If you do 'vgchange -ay guest' again then all of them will be activated because the locks have all been changed to CR by the previous command. I have a full set of logs and am investigating. Chrissie Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/719333/comments/5 On 2009-10-01T13:55:28+00:00 Alasdair wrote: Thanks for reporting this. It's definitely a bug and a possible solution is being tested. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lvm2/+bug/719333/comments/6 On 2009-10-01T15:04:32+00:00 Christine wrote: date: 2009/10/01 14:14:17; author: ccaulfield; state: Exp; lines: +1 -0 Stop clvmd from automatically doing lock conversions. Now, if a lock is granted at one mode and an attempt to convert it wthout the LCK_CONVERT flag set then it will return errno=EBUSY. It might break some things in other areas, but I doubt it. Checking in WHATS_NEW; /cvs/lvm2/LVM2/WHATS_NEW,v <-- WHATS_NEW new revision: 1.1286;
Re: [Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
U Pon, 14. 03. 2011., u 09:44 +, Bastian Mäuser je napisao/la: @ante: it should have worked the way i did it, i know that i had no resources configured, coz it didn't let me go so far. Well, no, not really. Some of the resources should've been configured. Most importantly, the one I already mentioned; DLM. Sure, you can have everything outside of pacemaker, but what's the point of pacemaker then? By just recompiling lvm to support openais, you still need DLM which supports pacemaker. For that, in Lucid, you have to recompile RedHat Cluster Suite, which is the source of DLM, and enable support for pacemaker in it. Of course, you could just use ubuntu-ha PPA and then you wouldn't have to compile anything by your self. Once you have those packages in place, you must start dlm_controld.pcmk, which brings DLM to pacemaker and then start clmvd on top of it. In case you don't want/have DLM, you have to look into the old and abandoned EVMS (unsupported everywhere). Your setup can't work anywhere. You need DLM. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
@tom: Manually AND with a selfcrafted initscript. It's working, and in the Logs of Openais i can see that some kind of info is being replicated through the cluster when i make changes to the LVM Metadata. @ante: it should have worked the way i did it, i know that i had no resources configured, coz it didn't let me go so far. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
** Changed in: lvm2 (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete = Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
I doubt this works on other Platform cause you haven't configured it right. You need DLM daemon that keeps track of locking between the blades. Also, your cluster configuration doesn't contain one single resources. I'm not sure how you expected this to work. Why do you run pacemaker at all, you didn't configure anything in it? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
Bastian, How are you bringing up clvmd? manually? via a modified init script? I don't see it as a resource in your crm output. ** Changed in: lvm2 (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed = Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
Nevermind, I realized that Ubuntu is no Cluster aware OS, and switched to another Platform. Sorry dudes, nearly one month of ignorance on such a heavy bug won't work. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
And further upstream fixes since allow snapshots to be used (on one machine only, with origin set exclusive on that machine). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
Hey, no one cares? Hello?! Ubuntu LTS is a real thread for Clusters now. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
Looks like this bug is fixed upstream: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517900 ** Bug watch added: Red Hat Bugzilla #517900 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517900 ** Also affects: lvm2 via https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517900 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Changed in: lvm2 Importance: Unknown = Undecided ** Changed in: lvm2 Status: Unknown = New ** Changed in: lvm2 Remote watch: Red Hat Bugzilla #517900 = None ** Changed in: lvm2 Importance: Undecided = Unknown ** Changed in: lvm2 Status: New = Unknown ** Changed in: lvm2 Remote watch: None = Red Hat Bugzilla #517900 ** Changed in: lvm2 (Ubuntu) Status: New = Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 719333] Re: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive
OK - so what can we do against it now? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719333 Title: CLVM not locking LV's properly even when set to exclusive -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
