Re: LANANA: To Pending Device Number Registrants

On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 02:35:55AM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote: > Heinz J. Mauelshag writes: > > > LVM does a similar thing storing UUIDs in its private metadata > > area on every device used by it. > > > > Problem is: neither MD nor LVM define a standard in Linux > > which *needs* to be used

Re: LANANA: To Pending Device Number Registrants

On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 02:35:55AM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote: Heinz J. Mauelshag writes: LVM does a similar thing storing UUIDs in its private metadata area on every device used by it. Problem is: neither MD nor LVM define a standard in Linux which *needs* to be used on every

Linux LVM: external CVS access

As announced 3 weeks ago, we have set up external CVS write access now. We hereby kindly invite major contributors like Andreas Dilger to join in :-) In order to set an account up, please send your address information (including postal, e-mail, phone and fax contacts) to me. We reserve the

Re: LANANA: To Pending Device Number Registrants

On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:09:32PM +0200, Thomas Kotzian wrote: > From: "Helge Hafting" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Partition id's seems more interesting than disk id's - we normally > > mount partitions not whole disks. > > > > RAID do this well - the raid autodetect partition stores an ID in the >

Re: LVM 1.0 release decision

On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 03:32:46PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > This leads to the dilemma, that trying to avoid further differences between > > our LVM releases and the stock kernel code would force us into postponing > > the pending LVM 1.0 release accordingly which OTOH is incovenient for the LVM

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM 1.0 release decision

On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 08:48:19PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Fri, 11 May 2001, Steven Lembark wrote: > > > for my part running the system i'd rather have the "production" > > LVM and kernel releases in sync and not have to worry about it. > > if i need a beta/inter-version release then

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM 1.0 release decision

On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 08:48:19PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: On Fri, 11 May 2001, Steven Lembark wrote: for my part running the system i'd rather have the production LVM and kernel releases in sync and not have to worry about it. if i need a beta/inter-version release then i'll deal

Re: LVM 1.0 release decision

On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 03:32:46PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: This leads to the dilemma, that trying to avoid further differences between our LVM releases and the stock kernel code would force us into postponing the pending LVM 1.0 release accordingly which OTOH is incovenient for the LVM

Re: LANANA: To Pending Device Number Registrants

On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:09:32PM +0200, Thomas Kotzian wrote: From: Helge Hafting [EMAIL PROTECTED] Partition id's seems more interesting than disk id's - we normally mount partitions not whole disks. RAID do this well - the raid autodetect partition stores an ID in the last block,

Linux LVM: external CVS access

As announced 3 weeks ago, we have set up external CVS write access now. We hereby kindly invite major contributors like Andreas Dilger to join in :-) In order to set an account up, please send your address information (including postal, e-mail, phone and fax contacts) to me. We reserve the

LVM 1.0 release decision

As most of you probably know, we've got criticism a couple of weeks ago about our Linux kernel patch policy causing the LVM vanilla kernel code to differ from the one we release directly. In order to avoid this difference we provide smaller patches more often now. We have started already with a

LVM 1.0 release decision

As most of you probably know, we've got criticism a couple of weeks ago about our Linux kernel patch policy causing the LVM vanilla kernel code to differ from the one we release directly. In order to avoid this difference we provide smaller patches more often now. We have started already with a

Re: Your message to linux-lvm awaits moderator approval

As atetd multiple times now... There never has been censorship. On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 02:44:40PM -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote: > Rik van Riel writes: > >[...] Andreas' patches got dropped over and over again and comments > >on the LVM code got refused by the moderators at Sistina ... If

Re: Your message to linux-lvm awaits moderator approval

As atetd multiple times now... There never has been censorship. On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 02:44:40PM -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote: Rik van Riel writes: [...] Andreas' patches got dropped over and over again and comments on the LVM code got refused by the moderators at Sistina ... If there's

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

Sorry, sorry. The lists are open. Please tell us if mailman still bothers. On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 03:46:53PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > "Jens" == Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Jens> First one gets a mail saying that the mail sent is queued for > Jens> moderator

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 03:35:43PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, AJ Lewis wrote: > > > It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature > > manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't > > bother to talk to them about

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:48:19PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19 2001, AJ Lewis wrote: > > It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature > > manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't > > bother to talk to them about it,

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:48:19PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: On Thu, Apr 19 2001, AJ Lewis wrote: It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature manner. Saying I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't bother to talk to them about it, I'll just

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

Sorry, sorry. The lists are open. Please tell us if mailman still bothers. On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 03:46:53PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote: Jens == Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jens First one gets a mail saying that the mail sent is queued for Jens moderator approval, since

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 08:25:15PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > > We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if > > > people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger > > > could check them *before* we start submitting them

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:04:21PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if > > people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger > > could check them *before* we start submitting them to Linus. > > I'll be glad to help look over

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:04:21PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger could check them *before* we start submitting them to Linus. I'll be glad to help look over them.

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 08:25:15PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: On Fri, Apr 20 2001, Alan Cox wrote: We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger could check them *before* we start submitting them to Linus.

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

Having just a couple of days of vacation I got informed today that a number of people got pissed off and decided to open a new Linux LVM mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Facts people complained about included: 1. people got dropped from the list 2. messages bouncing 3. lack of (small)

Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

Having just a couple of days of vacation I got informed today that a number of people got pissed off and decided to open a new Linux LVM mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Facts people complained about included: 1. people got dropped from the list 2. messages bouncing 3. lack of (small) LVM

Re: block device snapshot capability

On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 11:40:36PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > Is anyone aware of ongoing development to provide the capability > > to take a snapshot of a block device? > > It's part of Linux-LVM since version 0.8 and

Re: block device snapshot capability

On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 11:40:36PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: Hello all, Is anyone aware of ongoing development to provide the capability to take a snapshot of a block device? It's part of Linux-LVM since version 0.8 and thus part of

*** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 Beta 7 available at www.sistina.com

Hi all, a tarball of the Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.9.1 Beta 7 is available now at for download (Follow the "LVM 0.9.1-Beta7" link). This release fixes several bugs. See the CHANGELOG file contained in the tarball for further information. Please help us to

*** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 Beta 7 available at www.sistina.com

Hi all, a tarball of the Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.9.1 Beta 7 is available now at http://www.sistina.com/ for download (Follow the "LVM 0.9.1-Beta7" link). This release fixes several bugs. See the CHANGELOG file contained in the tarball for further information. Please help us to

Re: /dev/loop0 over lvm... leading to d-state :-(

On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 05:54:30PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Thu, Apr 05 2001, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote: > > > Where? Calling buffer_IO_error would be ok, but there are no such calls > > > in 2.4.3. I just stated elsewhere that submit_bh should probably be > &g

Re: /dev/loop0 over lvm... leading to d-state :-(

On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 05:37:31PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Thu, Apr 05 2001, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote: > > > Irks, another one. lvm_make_request_fn also needs to call b_end_io > > > if a map fails. > > > > This is wrong. > > > > In case of a

Re: /dev/loop0 over lvm... leading to d-state :-(

Jens, thanks for the b_dev hint you provided. On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 04:49:42PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Thu, Apr 05 2001, Jens Axboe wrote: > > To the LVM folks: you can't use b_dev or b_blocknr inside your > > make_request_fn, it destroys stacking drivers such as loop. And > > is just

Re: /dev/loop0 over lvm... leading to d-state :-(

Jens, thanks for the b_dev hint you provided. On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 04:49:42PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: On Thu, Apr 05 2001, Jens Axboe wrote: To the LVM folks: you can't use b_dev or b_blocknr inside your make_request_fn, it destroys stacking drivers such as loop. And is just plain

Re: /dev/loop0 over lvm... leading to d-state :-(

On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 05:37:31PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: On Thu, Apr 05 2001, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote: Irks, another one. lvm_make_request_fn also needs to call b_end_io if a map fails. This is wrong. In case of an io error we do already call buffer_IO_error() on 2.4

Re: /dev/loop0 over lvm... leading to d-state :-(

On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 05:54:30PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: On Thu, Apr 05 2001, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote: Where? Calling buffer_IO_error would be ok, but there are no such calls in 2.4.3. I just stated elsewhere that submit_bh should probably be clearing the dirty bit

*** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com

Hi all, a tarball of the Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.9.1 beta1 is available now at for download (Follow the "LVM download page" link). This release fixes several bugs including the vgextend(8) related oops. See the CHANGELOG file contained in the tarball for

*** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com

Hi all, a tarball of the Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.9.1 beta1 is available now at http://www.sistina.com/ for download (Follow the "LVM download page" link). This release fixes several bugs including the vgextend(8) related oops. See the CHANGELOG file contained in the tarball for

Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.8.1 and LVM 0.9 available at www.sistina.com

On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 02:36:04AM +, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > Perhaps yo should consider lowering number of stars in the subject. ;-) An annoucement filter is reliying on them, sorry. > > > Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.8.1 (this is 0.8final plus patches) > > and 0.9 are available

Re: RFC: Modularize /proc/partitons (was Re: /proc/partitions for LVM)

Looks good to me. Regards, Heinz -- The LVM guy -- On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 02:52:39PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: > "Heinz J. Mauelshagen" wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 04:27:51PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: > > > "Heinz J. Mauelshagen"

*** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.8.1 and LVM 0.9 available at www.sistina.com

Due to technical problems this might not have made it through... Sorry in advance if you get it twice. Hi all, Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.8.1 (this is 0.8final plus patches) and 0.9 are available for download at www.sistina.com. Please see further information below, test it and help us

Re: RFC: Modularize /proc/partitons (was Re: /proc/partitions for LVM)

Looks good to me. Regards, Heinz -- The LVM guy -- On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 02:52:39PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: "Heinz J. Mauelshagen" wrote: On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 04:27:51PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: "Heinz J. Mauelshagen" wrote: On Wed, Nov 22

Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.8.1 and LVM 0.9 available at www.sistina.com

On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 02:36:04AM +, Pavel Machek wrote: Hi! Perhaps yo should consider lowering number of stars in the subject. ;-) An annoucement filter is reliying on them, sorry. Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.8.1 (this is 0.8final plus patches) and 0.9 are available for

*** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.8.1 and LVM 0.9 available at www.sistina.com

Due to technical problems this might not have made it through... Sorry in advance if you get it twice. Hi all, Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.8.1 (this is 0.8final plus patches) and 0.9 are available for download at www.sistina.com. Please see further information below, test it and help us

*** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.8.1 and LVM 0.9 available at www.sistina.com

Hi all, Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.8.1 (this is 0.8final plus patches) and 0.9 are available for download at www.sistina.com. Please see further information below, test it and help us to make an even better LVM for Linux :-) Regards, Heinz -- The LVM guy -- The Logical Volume

Re: RFC: Modularize /proc/partitons (was Re: /proc/partitions for LVM)

On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 04:27:51PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: > "Heinz J. Mauelshagen" wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 04:05:39PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: > > > Question about /proc/partitions and LVM. LVM devices in > > > /proc/part

Re: /proc/partitions for LVM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 04:05:39PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: > Question about /proc/partitions and LVM. LVM devices in > /proc/partitions currently show up as lvma, lvmb, etc, depending on > their device number. This breaks things like mount by filesystem > name. Back when LVM existed

Re: /proc/partitions for LVM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 04:05:39PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: Question about /proc/partitions and LVM. LVM devices in /proc/partitions currently show up as lvma, lvmb, etc, depending on their device number. This breaks things like mount by filesystem name. Back when LVM existed as a

Re: RFC: Modularize /proc/partitons (was Re: /proc/partitions for LVM)

On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 04:27:51PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: "Heinz J. Mauelshagen" wrote: On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 04:05:39PM -0500, Brian Kress wrote: Question about /proc/partitions and LVM. LVM devices in /proc/partitions currently show up as lvma, lvmb, etc,

*** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.8.1 and LVM 0.9 available at www.sistina.com

Hi all, Linux Logical Volume Manager 0.8.1 (this is 0.8final plus patches) and 0.9 are available for download at www.sistina.com. Please see further information below, test it and help us to make an even better LVM for Linux :-) Regards, Heinz -- The LVM guy -- The Logical Volume

Re: LVM snapshotting broken?

On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:55:03AM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:32:06AM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > Have you checked if the CONTENT of the snapshot is indeed > > > the right LV and not the other one? > > > > laser:~

Re: LVM snapshotting broken?

Hi Rik, I can't reproduce it on my box. Could you provide a "lvcreate -d" output of what you did to help me to dig into that one. Did somebody else out there face the same 0.8final snapshot weirdness? On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 04:36:37PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote: > Hi Heinz, > > it looks

Multiple access to drives

With 2.4.0-test8 i am able to access one and the same scsi disk by /dev/sdb _and_ /dev/sdd at the same time. Wondering if it is a bug or a feature ;-{) -- Regards, Heinz -- The LVM guy -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Heinz Mauelshagen

Multiple access to drives

With 2.4.0-test8 i am able to access one and the same scsi disk by /dev/sdb _and_ /dev/sdd at the same time. Wondering if it is a bug or a feature ;-{) -- Regards, Heinz -- The LVM guy -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Heinz Mauelshagen

*** Announcement *** 2nd Annual Linux Storage Management Workshop

Hi, Please consider attending the 2nd Annual Linux Storage Management Workshop in Miami, Florida, to be held from Oct. 15th-19th at the University of Miami. More information about the conference can be found at http://www.globalfilesystem.org/Pages/Miami2000.html Speakers include: Stephen

*** Announcement *** 2nd Annual Linux Storage Management Workshop

Hi, Please consider attending the 2nd Annual Linux Storage Management Workshop in Miami, Florida, to be held from Oct. 15th-19th at the University of Miami. More information about the conference can be found at http://www.globalfilesystem.org/Pages/Miami2000.html Speakers include: Stephen

Re: [PATCH] devfs support for LVM

On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 04:02:15PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 03:48:53PM +0000, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote: > > > I can add a patch that does full-blown devfs > > > checking to the tools, but this needs a lot of work. > > >

Re: [PATCH] devfs support for LVM

On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 04:02:15PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 03:48:53PM +, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote: I can add a patch that does full-blown devfs checking to the tools, but this needs a lot of work. Actually changing the tools to recognize devfs