Re: Fwd: GFS volume hangs on 3 nodes after gfs_grow

["Alan A" <alan.zg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thank you bob for all the hard work. I am sorry for not being specific from the get go.

Just a little info to some future readers - if you get:
"Skipping cluster volume group"  - all you have to do is change /etc/lvm/lvm.conf locking to type 3.

   # Type of locking to use. Defaults to local file-based locking (1).
    # Turn locking off by setting to 0 (dangerous: risks metadata corruption
    # if LVM2 commands get run concurrently).
    # Type 2 uses the external shared library locking_library.
    # Type 3 uses built-in clustered locking.
    locking_type = 3

Thanks all for the help.

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Bob Peterson <rpeterso@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

----- "Alan A" <alan.zg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

| gfs_sda1     1   1   0 wz--n- 10.00G 5.00G
|   gfs_sdb1     1   1   0 wz--n- 10.00G 3.50G
|
| The vg's are not enabled with the cluster bit. I am sorry for not
| being more
| informative on LVM. If I enable cluster bit with vgchange -c command
| would
| that convert the volumes to cluster volume group, or should I start
| by
| blowing them away?

Hi Alan,

It's perfectly fine to enable the clustered bit with vgchange -cy,
and that flags the entire vg and all the lvs inside it.
You should probably unmount-then-mount the gfs file system on all
the nodes after that, just to be safe.  I don't think you need to
remount on the node that did the gfs_grow though.

The missing clustered bit is probably the cause of all your grief,
so I wouldn't bother opening a ticket, unless you can recreate
the failure with the clustered bit on, after umount-then-mount.

Regards,

Bob Peterson
Red Hat Clustering & GFS

--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster

--
Alan A.

--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster