On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 01:54:36PM +0200, Joachim Banzhaf wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 20. August 2003 12:46 schrieb Heinz J . Mauelshagen: > > Joachim, > > First, thanks for your quick response, Heinz. > > > LVM1 isn't cluster aware. > > I knew that - as I stated, I read the FAQ :-). > > > DRBD devices are just some other "local" ones for it. > > OK, but as i stated, I used them that way. LVM1 just seems to use the lower > level devices drbd works on instead. That's what's bothering me. Ah, missed that point :( LVM2 is your better option because it supports device name filters in a config file rather than hard-coded ones. > To make clear what I mean, here some details: > > I have /dev/nb1 as resource lvm1 on top of /dev/sdb1 in /etc/drbd.conf <SNIP> > devices and used despite of pvcreate commandline options. > As I stated, to follow this hypothesis I used a patch to make lvm tools ignore > the partitions /dev/sdbx. > The vgdisplay output then shows the nbx devices (even without vgscan'ning or > something). But they are not used by the kernel anyway as I see no activity > on /proc/drbd :-( > > > No replication is done by LVM1. > > Yes, that's why I use drbd :-) > > > The whole replication process is up to DRBD, that's why you > > need to start it using a DRBD command. > > > > You can use hartbeat to recognize if a node dies and scripts to start LVM > > on the living node to access logical volumes there. > > I have a fully working set of linux, lvm1, heartbeat and drbd with services on > top. I know how they work (from a user/admin perspective - and a bit more). > And they work fine for me (including failovers of course) as long as I use > drbd resources on top of lv's. > But I want to use drbd resources as pv's. > That seems not to work, because LVM1 persists in using the partition and not > the drbd network block device although I configured it that way (as stated my > original post). > > Again, to clear the ground: Should it be possible at all to use pv's on top of > drbd devices or am I forced to use drbd devices on top of lv's and loose > things like online resize feature? > > Have you - or anybody reading the list - ever sucessfully used that scenario? I don't. List ? > > > Regards, > > Heinz -- The LVM Guy -- > > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 11:41:20AM +0200, Joachim Banzhaf wrote: > > > Hi list, > > > > > > I'd like to use LVM1 on top of DRBD 0.6.6 and not the other way round, > > > because I then can resize my partitions online (add a new drbd device, > > > make it a pv, add it to a vg, be happy). > > > > > > It just seems not to be that simple. > > > > > > The HOWTO warns about LVM not being cluster aware and describes how to do > > > it anyway on shared storage. I (think I) have these requirements met by > > > using heartbeat to have vg's active at one node only and running vgscan > > > on the secondary after changes on the primary. > > > > > > I created the pv's using the /dev/nbx devices (x=1,2). > > > I created the vg lvm-drbd with lv lv1-s2 using these pv's. > > > > > > The corresponding haresources file is this: > > > job-vm1 192.168.1.101 datadisk::lvm1 datadisk::lvm2 LVM::lvm-drbd \ > > > Filesystem::/dev/lvm-drbd/lv1-s2::/ha/export::reiserfs > > > > > > What I get is lvm using the lower level device (sdbx in my case). > > > vgdisplay -vD shows the pv's using /dev/sdbx. > > > Nothing gets replicated to the other node (not surprising then). > > > I even patched lvm_check_dev.c and rebuilt the lvm tools to ignore > > > /dev/sdbx devices, removed all lvm infos from /etc and did a new vgscan > > > and vgcfgbackup. vgdisplay -vD now shows the /dev/nbx devices for the > > > pv's. But still no replication without drbdsetup /dev/nbx replicate :-(. > > > > > > I use suse 8.2 with suse 2.4.20-4GB kernel (you'ed a few weeks ago) > > > for the lvm_check_dev.c-patch I installed the lvm source rpm, modified > > > the spec file not to use the mp patches (because a file was missing), > > > added my patchfile and did a rpm -bi /usr/src/packages/SPECS/lvm.spec. > > > > > > Btw. the build process did not stop on compile errors in lvm_check_dev.c. > > > Is that intended? It is confusing... > > > > > > What am I doing wrong? > > > Is it possible doing LVM on top of DRBD at all? > > > > > > I'd happily provide more details if it helps. > > > > > > Ciao, > > > > > > Joachim Banzhaf > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > linux-lvm mailing list > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/ > > > > *** Software bugs are stupid. > > Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them *** > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-lvm mailing list > > linux-lvm@sistina.com > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/ > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-lvm mailing list > linux-lvm@sistina.com > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/ Heinz -- The LVM Guy -- *** Software bugs are stupid. Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them *** =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc. Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11 56242 Marienrachdorf Germany Mauelshagen@Sistina.com +49 2626 141200 FAX 924446 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@sistina.com http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
