[lvm-devel] [PATCH] LVM2 RFC: fix return code when exclusive activation fails

[Alasdair G Kergon]

I don't see that a new error code gains us anything there:

If operating on multiple objects and you need to know which ones did or
didn't succeed, then you simply perform the operations separately.

Only use commands that operate on multiple objects when you aren't
interested in knowing.


The bugzilla referenced is discussing "What precisely should -ae" mean?
Should it be different from "-ael" ?  Under precisely what sets of
circumstances should it return an error, and based on the final state
or whether a change happened?


The man page says:
    If clustered locking is enabled, -ae will  activate  exclusively
    on  one  node and -aly will activate only on the local node.

Note that it does *not* say -ae will activate exclusively on the
*local* node.


Alasdair
-- 
agk at redhat.com