Can we broaden the scope and also allow passing createVG partitioned devices with an override flag or something? (we'd need to check the devices and run "kpartx -d" and fdisk to clean the devices before calling pvcreate).
----- Original Message ----- > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 07:46:17PM +0200, Livnat Peer wrote: > > On 17/01/12 16:08, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 03:08:13PM +0200, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: > > >> Hi Lists, > > >> > > >> One cannot create a PV on a partitioned device, and therefor > > >> such > > >> devices where not reported to Engine. This proved surprising to > > >> users > > >> who woder where their LUN disappeared. > > >> > > >> Vdsm should report all devices, and ovirt-engine should mark > > >> partitioned > > >> devices as unworthy of a PV. In the future, Vdsm may allow to > > >> forcefully > > >> remove a partition table from a device, to make it usable as a > > >> PV. > > >> > > >> Douglas (CCed) would take resposibilty on the Vdsm side. Initial > > >> patch at > > >> http://gerrit.ovirt.org/944 sports a backword-compatible API. > > >> Who's taking this > > >> on Engine? This involves GUI, too, as partitioned devices should > > >> probably be > > >> displayed greyed-out. > > > > > > Livnat, is there any taker for this on your side? > > > > > > Since the change is backward-compatible, I would push it if there > > > are no > > > objections. > > > > > > Dan. > > > > Hi Danken, > > > > How did you mark a partitioned device? (How will the engine will > > spot > > these LUNs) > > Each device has a field 'partitioned'. Currently, Engine ignores it > (as it is > always False). With my little patch, devices with partitioned=True > would be > reported, too. > > Dan. > _______________________________________________ > vdsm-devel mailing list > firstname.lastname@example.org > https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel > _______________________________________________ vdsm-devel mailing list email@example.com https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel