|
Hi, Yes, I understand that. However, what I meant is that, from a
configuration simplicity point of view, it could be convenient to add the
functionality into a only resource that take care of the entire cycle, logical
volume activation in exclusive mode and mounting it. I think this is the most
common usage of the fs resource. In this way, I don’t need to create two
resources for each filesystem (one for the logical volume and one other for the
fs) and I can be sure a filesystem can not be mounted by hand in another node (as
it has been activate exclusively in the node running the service). Best regards, Alfredo From:
linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of brem belguebli Alfredo, The resource Rafael created operates at As far as I understand, a FS exclusive tag would be efficient
only under rgmanager control, but it wouldn't if an admin decided to mount the
FS by hand on another cluster node. Brem 2009/8/18, Moralejo, Alfredo <alfredo.moralejo@xxxxxxxxx>:
Hi Brem, Maybe I did not explain it properly. What I mean is that fs resource should activate the
filesystems in exclusive mode as
the resource created by Rafael does (lvm-cluster.sh) as I far as I understand
to ensure the filesystem can not be mounted in other nodes accidentally. Best regards, Alfredo From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of brem belguebli
Hello
Alfredo, For the
exclusive bypass, I have opened a bugzilla ticket. Hopefully it'll
be fixed (enhanced)0 For your
second point, I'm not sure to ubndestand what you're saying. My
concern is to avoid manual activation on the wrong node, not an accidental
rgmanager activation. Even if
you configure your FS resource as exclusive, if it is possible, this won't be
of any effect with ext3 outside of rgmanager control as it is not
cluster aware. 2009/8/18,
Moralejo, Alfredo <alfredo.moralejo@xxxxxxxxx>: Hi, I have the same concern with the activation of non-GFS file
systems and I agree with the idea of using exclusive activation (keeping in
mind that the strange behavior of exclusive tag being bypassed should be
fixed). However, from my point of view, the best way is not to create a new
resource but adding a new “exclusive” option to the regular fs resource or
something like that, as I think it’s the desired behavior most times the fs
resource is used. Best regards, Alfredo From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of brem belguebli Hi
Rafael, Of
course, that is what I was telling you the other day, your script works fine,
but I just wanted to twist a little clvm. The
prerequisites are already setup (locking type, dm-mp, lvm, etc...). The only
thing that disturbes me is that you can bypass under certain conditions the
locking. Thanks
for the help Brem 2009/8/1
Rafael Micó Miranda <rmicmirregs@xxxxxxxxx> Hi Brem, > > -- Sorry,
i'm not sure if I missed this mail.
|
-- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
