So it turns out simply running lvconvert --repair fixed the issue and lvs is now reporting the correct utilization. On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 12:09 PM John Hamilton wrote: > Thanks for the response. > > >Is this everything? > > Yes, that is everything in the metadata xml dump. I just removed all of > the *_mapping entries for brevity. For the lvs output I removed other > logical volumes that aren't related to this pool. > > >Is this a pool used by docker, which does not (did not) use LVM to > manage thin-volumes? > > It's not docker, but it is an application called serviced that uses > docker's library for managing the volumes > > >LVM just queries DM, and displays whatever that provides > > Yeah, it looks like dmsetup status output matches lvs: > > myvg-my--pool: 0 5242880000 thin-pool 70 207941/4145152 29018611/40960000 - rw discard_passdown queue_if_no_space - > myvg-my--pool_tdata: 0 4194304000 <(419)%20430-4000> linear > myvg-my--pool_tdata: 4194304000 <(419)%20430-4000> 1048576000 linear > myvg-my--pool_tmeta: 0 33161216 linear > > >What is kernel/lvm version? > > # uname -r > 3.10.0-693.21.1.el7.x86_64 > > # lvm version > LVM version: 2.02.171(2)-RHEL7 (2017-05-03) > Library version: 1.02.140-RHEL7 (2017-05-03) > Driver version: 4.35.0 > Configuration: ./configure --build=x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu --program-prefix= --disable-dependency-tracking --prefix=/usr --exec-prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/bin --sbindir=/usr/sbin --sysconfdir=/etc --datadir=/usr/share --includedir=/usr/include --libdir=/usr/lib64 --libexecdir=/usr/libexec --localstatedir=/var --sharedstatedir=/var/lib --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --with-default-dm-run-dir=/run --with-default-run-dir=/run/lvm --with-default-pid-dir=/run --with-default-locking-dir=/run/lock/lvm --with-usrlibdir=/usr/lib64 --enable-lvm1_fallback --enable-fsadm --with-pool=internal --enable-write_install --with-user= --with-group= --with-device-uid=0 --with-device-gid=6 --with-device-mode=0660 --enable-pkgconfig --enable-applib --enable-cmdlib --enable-dmeventd --enable-blkid_wiping --enable-python2-bindings --with-cluster=internal --with-clvmd=corosync --enable-cmirrord --with-udevdir=/usr/lib/udev/rules.d --enable-udev_sync --with-thin=internal --enable-lvmetad --with-cache=internal --enable-lvmpolld --enable-lvmlockd-dlm --enable-lvmlockd-sanlock --enable-dmfilemapd > > >Is thin_check_executable configured in lvm.conf? > > Yes > > I also just found out that they apparently ran thin_check recently and got > a message about a corrupt superblock, but didn't repair it. They were > still able to re-activate the pool though. We'll run a repair as soon as we > get a chance and see if that fixes it. > > Thanks, > > John > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 3:54 AM Marian Csontos > wrote: > >> On 05/11/2018 10:21 AM, Joe Thornber wrote: >> > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 07:30:09PM +0000, John Hamilton wrote: >> >> I saw something today that I don't understand and I'm hoping somebody >> can >> >> help. We had a ~2.5TB thin pool that was showing 69% data utilization >> in >> >> lvs: >> >> >> >> # lvs -a >> >> LV VG Attr LSize Pool Origin Data% >> >> Meta% Move Log Cpy%Sync Convert >> >> my-pool myvg twi-aotz-- 2.44t 69.04 4.90 >> >> [my-pool_tdata] myvg Twi-ao---- 2.44t >> >> [my-pool_tmeta] myvg ewi-ao---- 15.81g >> >> Is this everything? Is this a pool used by docker, which does not (did >> not) use LVM to manage thin-volumes? >> >> >> However, when I dump the thin pool metadata and look at the >> mapped_blocks >> >> for the 2 devices in the pool, I can only account for about 950GB. >> Here is >> >> the superblock and device entries from the metadata xml. There are no >> >> other devices listed in the metadata: >> >> >> >> > >> data_block_size="128" nr_data_blocks="0"> >> >> > >> creation_time="0" snap_time="14"> >> >> > >> creation_time="15" snap_time="34"> >> >> >> >> That first device looks like it has about 16GB allocated to it and the >> >> second device about 950GB. So, I would expect lvs to show somewhere >> >> between 950G-966G Is something wrong, or am I misunderstanding how to >> read >> >> the metadata dump? Where is the other 700 or so GB that lvs is showing >> >> used? >> > >> > The non zero snap_time suggests that you're using snapshots. I which >> case it >> > could just be there is common data shared between volumes that is >> getting counted >> > more than once. >> > >> > You can confirm this using the thin_ls tool and specifying a format >> line that >> > includes EXCLUSIVE_BLOCKS, or SHARED_BLOCKS. Lvm doesn't take shared >> blocks into >> > account because it has to scan all the metadata to calculate what's >> shared. >> >> LVM just queries DM, and displays whatever that provides. You could see >> that in `dmsetup status` output, there are two pairs of '/' separated >> entries - first is metadata usage (USED_BLOCKS/ALL_BLOCKS), second data >> usage (USED_CHUNKS/ALL_CHUNKS). >> >> So the error lies somewhere between dmsetup and kernel. >> >> What is kernel/lvm version? >> Is thin_check_executable configured in lvm.conf? >> >> -- Martian >> >