On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 03:55:55AM +0000, Gang He wrote:
> but I cannot do online LV reduce from one node, 
> the workaround is to switch VG activation_mode to exclusive, run lvreduce 
> command on the node where VG is activated.
> Does this behaviour is by-design? or a bug?

It was intentional since shrinking the cluster fs and LV isn't very common
(not supported for gfs2).

> For pvmove command, I cannot do online pvmove from one node,
> The workaround is to switch VG activation_mode to exclusive, run pvmove 
> command on the node where VG is activated.
> Does this behaviour is by-design? do we do some enhancements in the furture?
> or any workaround to run pvmove under shared  activation_mode? e.g. --lockopt 
> option can help this situation?

pvmove is implemented with mirroring, so that mirroring would need to be
replaced with something that works with concurrent access, e.g. cluster md
raid1.  I suspect there are better approaches than pvmove to solve the
broader problem.

Dave

_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/

Reply via email to