archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gang He <>
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] discussion about activation/auto_activation_volume_list
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:28:21 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On 11/18/2020 12:17 AM, David Teigland wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 04:00:10PM +0800, wrote:
>> Hello LVM-maintainers,
>> Currently activation/auto_activation_volume_list is not enable and it does the default behavior:
>>    pvscan will activate all the devices on booting.
>> This rule will trigger a clumsy process in HA (corosync+pacemaker stack) env.
>> ## let me show the scenario:
>> 2 nodes (A & B) share a disk, and using systemid to manage vg/lv on this shared disk.
>> (keep the activation/auto_activation_volume_list default style: comment out this cfg item)
>> (below steps come from resource-agent LVM-active script)
>> 1. Node A own & active shared vg/lv, node B standby status.
>> 2. A reboot, B detect & wait for A rejoined cluster.
>> 3. because systemid doesn't be changed, lvm2-pvscan@.service will active the vg/lv on A during booting.
>> 4. A finishes reboot, B starts to switch systemid & active shared vg/lv.
>> 5. on B, pacemaker detects lvm resource is running on both nodes.
>> 6. on B, pacemaker restarts lvm resource and enable it on single node.
>> ## rootcause:
>> we can see step 3,4,5 is useless if step 3 is non-existent.
>> So the rootcause is step <3>: node A auto activate shared vg/lv.
> I believe there's an assumption that the system or a user will not
> activate LVs that are managed by the cluster, i.e. only LVM-activate will
> activate LVs managed by the cluster.  Perhaps we could make some attempt
> to enforce that, or at least make sure the instructions for LVM-activate
> make it clear what to do.
>> ## discussion (how to fix):
>> Could activation/auto_activation_volume_list support a new symbol/function like "!".
>> e.g.
>> auto_activation_volume_list = [ "!vg1", "!vg2/lvol1" ]
>> the '!' means lvm absolutely doesn't active this vg1 & vg2/lvol1 automatically.
>> my question:
>> Does it acceptable for LVM2 adding this new function?
> auto_activation_volume_list is difficult to use IMO, and I don't think
> many people use it.  Your suggestion sounds reasonable, but I've wondered
> if autoactivation should be a property set on the VG or LV itself (i.e.
> in the metadata)?  The "activationskip" flag is a possible way to handle
> the unwanted autoactivation, and also seems to justify the idea of making
> autoactivation a similar flag.
I prefer to use a metadata flag for each VG or LV to skip auto-activation.
Otherwise, it is not easy for the pacemaker cluster to manager a local 
VG(e.g. local or systemid type) in a cluster via active-passive mode.


> Dave
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> read the LVM HOW-TO at

  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-18  1:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-17  8:00 [linux-lvm] discussion about activation/auto_activation_volume_list heming.zhao
2020-11-17 16:17 ` David Teigland
2020-11-18  1:28   ` Gang He [this message]
2020-11-18 18:23     ` David Teigland
2020-11-19  2:56       ` Gang He
2020-11-19  6:46       ` heming.zhao
2020-11-18 15:38   ` heming.zhao

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).