Отправлено с iPhone
> 29 авг. 2015 г., в 21:51, Jorge Fábregas <jorge.fabre...@gmail.com> > написал(а): > >> On 08/29/2015 02:37 PM, Digimer wrote: >> No need for clustered LVM, only the active node should see the PV. When >> the passive takes over, after connecting to the PV, it should do a >> pvscan -> vgscan -> lvscan before mounting the FS on the LV. >> >> Keep you cluster simple; remove everything not needed. > > Hi Digimer, > > It would be great if my cluster could communicate with the storage-array > to make it "present" or "unpresent" LUNs based on the cluster conditions > but I'm afraid that's not possible :) Just use SCSI-3 persistent reservations to grant exclusive access to a node that has active resources. > So yes, these are LUNs that are > visible on both nodes. > > I'm the one who asked you something regarding cLVM on IRC the other day > (one of the many times you have helped me there) and I decided to go the > cLVM/DLM route (because the LUNs are seen on both nodes) I do not quite understand what it gains you. How having LVs on both nodes is different from having underlying raw devices? > but now I have > my issues with this VG activation. > > Thanks. > > Regards, > Jorge > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org > http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
