From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 13:16:09 -0400 From: David Teigland Message-ID: <20130319171608.GE986@redhat.com> References: <1363699970-10002-1-git-send-email-bubble@hoster-ok.com> <1363699970-10002-11-git-send-email-bubble@hoster-ok.com> <20130319153215.GB986@redhat.com> <5148874A.2060106@hoster-ok.com> <20130319155456.GC986@redhat.com> <514897BE.90609@hoster-ok.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <514897BE.90609@hoster-ok.com> Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] [PATCH 10/10] man: document --node option to lvchange Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Vladislav Bogdanov Cc: linux-lvm@redhat.com On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 07:52:14PM +0300, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote: > And, do you have any estimations, how long may it take to have you ideas > ready for production use? It'll be quite a while (and the new locking scheme I'm working on will not include remote command execution.) > Also, as you're not satisfied with this implementation, what alternative > way do you see? (calling ssh from libvirt or LVM API is not a good idea > at all I think) Apart from using ovirt/rhev, I'd try one of the following behind the libvirt locking api: sanlock, dlm, file locks on nfs, file locks on gfs2. There may also be ways to run remote commands other than ssh that would work better from libvirt, although I don't have any specific suggestion.