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

[linux-lvm] Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 1.0 available at www.sistina.com


I just picked your e-mail standing for a couple to summarize:

- some people report, that the bi-directional upgrade path from
  <= LVM 0.9.1 Beta 7 to LVM 0.9.1 Beta 8 and beyond is fine
- some people complain that there could be an easier solution
  and that there are just 2 cases to distinguish which could easily be covered
  by a better upgrade tool which is *not* true

As Joe stated easily and I tried to explain briefly a while ago:
there's multiple cases and the solution we have right now seemed to be the
cleanest approach to cover them all *without* hitting the trape of missing some!

Because we take your complaints seriously we are investigating, if there's a
well defined finite amount of cases that we actually can cover with a simple

If so, you are going get it ;-)

Please stay tuned and give as some time...

We'll keep you posted.

Thanks for your understanding!

Heinz    -- The LVM Guy --

On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 07:19:12PM +0200, Kurt Garloff wrote:
> Hi Heinz,
> thanks for your reply!
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 06:50:05PM +0200, Heinz J . Mauelshagen wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 06:25:48PM +0200, Kurt Garloff wrote:
> > > Is there finally a decent way to upgrade from 0.9.1b7?
> > > Or is it still required to have multiple versions of the utils installed
> > > just in order to be able to update from 0.9.1b7 to b8 (or 1.0)?
> > 
> > Well, as explained before on the lists we had an algorithm calculating
> > the offset to the first PE in place till 0.9.1 Beta 7.
> > 
> > Therefore, we *need* to run the installed version < LVM 0.9.1 Beta 8 to
> > retrieve that sector offset for all PVs and change the metadata to hold the
> > offset. No known way around this.
> What about adding migration code to newer LVM tools?
> Make them able to get the offset to the first PE and write them to the new
> place in the PV on vgscan, so the upgrade procedure is painless, because
> it works automatically and tranparently. The only thing a user has to watch
> is to keep kernel and userspace LVM in sync then.
> I can't imagine this to be too difficult, honestly. The code is there.
> You wanted to get rid of it, apparently, but why can't that be postponed?
> Installing different versions of lvm tools in parallel in order to do
> the upgrade inside some ramdisk of your installation system with 100% 
> success sounds much more painful to me.
> Left alone those people who follow a different upgrade path than the
> standard one envisioned by us.
> > > If yes, then I'd vote for not updating the kernel until this is fixed!
> > 
> > Well, we need to migrate the metadata in the future anyway once we want
> > to offer support for enhanced metadata reliability and redundancy.
> > We'll provide bidirectional migration tools for that then which will enable
> > the user to swicth back and forth between 2 installed LVM versions.
> Now, that sounds better.
> > Let's keep the ball flat WRT to the migration path here.
> > We've got mails with positive LVM 0.9.1 Beta 8 upgrade reports and
> > no complaints TTBOMK.
> Because most people just refused to upgrade given the difficulties.
> Nobody wants to put his data at risk.
> As it stands, I guess, SuSE will also need to refuse :-(
> This is a pain, because decoupling would be bad for both sides: 
> People (our customers) can't profit from your improvements and bugfixes any
> longer and you'll get bug reports for old versions instead of testing of
> your recent version. 
> To be honest, I'd personally be disappointed if this happens:
> SuSE has supported the usage of LVM and offers support for it in the
> installation tool; I seriously suspect that the majority of LVM-users
> is using SuSE Linux. 
> Now, leaving them alone WRT upgrade is not very nice. 
> You'll get decoupled from your user base.
> Let's try to avoid that, please!
> Regards,
> -- 
> Kurt Garloff  <garloff suse de>                          Eindhoven, NL
> GPG key: See mail header, key servers         Linux kernel development
> SuSE GmbH, Nuernberg, DE                                SCSI, Security

*** 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
Mauelshagen Sistina com                           +49 2626 141200
                                                       FAX 924446

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