[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: copying lvm with the same name

Frank Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
> Dean S. Messing wrote:
> > Regarding the actual problem the OP seems to have, it seems to me (not
> > being an LVM expert) from his output that he has a Volume Group (00)
> > that spans sda2 and sdb2, two LVs that are defined in the VG, both of
> > which sit on sdb2, but no LV defined on sda2.  Is this unusual?
> I actually have two Volume Group 00's, one on each of sda2 and sdb2.

>From your earlier posted output that was not clear to me (but, again,
I'm not an expert).  On my F10 system, which LV organisation I hand
configured after installing non-lvm on an outboard disk (because I
wanted to do stuff I didn't know how to make anaconda do), I have:

   [root neuron ~]# pvscan
     PV /dev/sdb3   VG vg01   lvm2 [148.17 GB / 0    free]
     PV /dev/sdc3   VG vg01   lvm2 [148.17 GB / 0    free]
     PV /dev/sda2   VG vg00   lvm2 [73.77 GB / 64.00 GB free]
     Total: 3 [370.11 GB] / in use: 3 [370.11 GB] / in no VG: 0 [0   ]
   [root neuron ~]# vgscan
     Reading all physical volumes.  This may take a while...
     Found volume group "vg01" using metadata type lvm2
     Found volume group "vg00" using metadata type lvm2
   [root neuron ~]# lvscan
     ACTIVE            '/dev/vg01/lv00' [117.19 GB] inherit
     ACTIVE            '/dev/vg01/lv01' [19.53 GB] inherit
     ACTIVE            '/dev/vg01/lv02' [19.53 GB] inherit
     ACTIVE            '/dev/vg01/lv03' [140.09 GB] inherit
     ACTIVE            '/dev/vg00/lv00' [9.77 GB] inherit

>From my pvscan output, one might say that I have two vg01 volume
groups.  In fact, I have one vg01 VG spanning sdb3 and sdc3 (both of
which of identical size on identical disks---I'm running interleaved
Logical Extents---similar to RAID 0.

The reason I said I thought you might have a misunderstanding is
because of this statement from an earlier post of yours:

: I don't know if this comes back to the fact that the volume names on both sda2
: and sdb2 are the same, so it's only showing me the first (or last) one that it
: finds?

I took "same volume names" as "same logical volume names" and
assumed you were confusing LVs and VGs since I have not seen anything
indicating that the actual LV names were the same.  But you may have
just typed "volume group" as "volume".

Haveing said all this, I understand you _do_ still have a problem:

> sda2 is "live" in that it's the one that I'm using right this minute.

I may have missed it but is sda the drive that's been on the current
machine all along?  Has it been 465 GB all along?  I ask this because
I have a machine running F6 that somehow swaps the names sda and
sdb. In fstab the "sdb" disk (according to df) is listed as "sda".
It's running a hardware (non-fake) RAID, though, so it is not the same
situation as yours.

> sdb2 is somehow both present and not present, depending on how you
> look at it, 

Your comment also seems to apply to sda2 since it is present in the df
output but not in the "lvdisplay -vm" output.

> but it doesn't appear to be accessible in its current
> form.  I'm considering using fdisk to remove the partitions on it and
> re-create something "from new" but I'm not entirely sure how wise that
> would be, or exactly what I should create on there.

Well, being a researcher, I'd not do this, but rather figure out
exactly what's causing the funning remapping. But you may not be the
curious type. :-)

> Another approach would be to just forget it and leave everything as-is until
> such time as I reformat and reinstall Fedora on this box (if that ever happens)
> at which time I think the installer would automatically do its thing and create
> a volume that occupies both hard drives.  After all, everything is working
> and this extra drive is neither helping or hurting my activities.  But it seems
> to me that a logical volume, by its nature, should be easily expandable without
> taking drastic measures.

Maybe you said this already, but what does the machine report
(`lvdisplay -vm' and `vgdisplay -v' in particular), if you remove the
added drive (sdb?).


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]