Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
/ 2004-10-28 10:27:02 +0200 \ Marc Cousin: > On Thursday 28 October 2004 10:01, Alex Ongena wrote: > > We are using drbd on top of LVM 1 to replicate an LVM partition, > > and it seems to work fine. > > Also our (external) meta data device is an LVM device. > > Regards > > alex > > > > linux 2.4.24 + drbd 0.7.5 + LVM 1 (not patched, what's in the kernel > > tree) > > Not my question. I need to use a drbd as a PV, don't want to manage 12 drbds > or more on a machine, and not resizing or snapshotting easily. > > I allready have a working configuration (a minor update in the lvm tools > code), but I need to know if this is dangerous (it seems OK to me to > replicate the entire disks). the problem was that vgscan would detect and activate the lower level devices instead of the "transparent virtual" block devices, like md, drbd, whatever. it works with lvm2, since they by design know about include and exclude device (pattern) filters. maybe with drbd "internal" meta data lvm1 just works anyways, because the lvm meta data is not found where expected on the lower level device, and therefore not recognized. if you patch lvm1 to exclude certain devices in a similar fashion, that could work, too. only, you have to get it right. you really do not want lvm to activate your lower level device. and I don't see any reason to patch lvm1, if lvm2 is available, and more powerful. Lars Ellenberg -- please use the "List-Reply" function of your email client.