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

Re: [lvm-devel] [PATCH] Disable automatic MISSING_PV recovery when handles_missing_pvs is set (BZ 653643)


Alasdair G Kergon <agk redhat com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 09:37:38PM +0100, Peter Rockai wrote:
>> it seems I did everything but actually posted the proposed patch for BZ
>> 653643. The explanation of what goes wrong where and how the patch fixes
>> that is in BZ comments.
> So what does the new output in the test case in that bz look like?
> Do we still get the last WARNING message?   (Where does it come from?
> Maybe it's too hard to fix that without removing it from other code
> paths where we do still want it?)

Which WARNING message you mean? There is only one in each command:
inconsistent metadata, we can't get rid of that one. About the PV not
found, I think it's better with the message than without. On the other
hand, we *could* make vgextend --restoremissing behave just like normal
vgextend if the PV is actually not part of the VG. But I think it's
better for scriptability (and predictability) to not do that.


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