[DRBD-user] Howto define disk-barrier/disk-flushes different on both hosts

Igor Cicimov igorc at encompasscorporation.com
Sat Dec 17 08:45:14 CET 2016

Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.

On 17 Dec 2016 1:07 pm, "Jasmin J." <jasmin at anw.at> wrote:


I have a machine (A) with a RAID1 and a BBU. On top of a partition of this
is LVM and then DRBD 8.4.

The other machine (B), which is the DRBD mirror for the former mentioned
partition, has a normal SATA disk. I try to use Protocol A, so it makes
to configure disk-barrier and disk-flushes different on machine A (quick)
B (slower).

Here is my config:
resource vm-100-disk-root {
         net {
                 # allow-two-primaries;
                 after-sb-0pri discard-zero-changes;
                 after-sb-1pri discard-secondary;
                 after-sb-2pri disconnect;
         disk {

This is 8.3 syntax

         volume 0 {
                 device /dev/drbd0;
                 meta-disk internal;
         on serverA {
                 # LVM on top of RAID1
                 disk /dev/vg_vm_disks_A/vm_100_disk_root;
                 # we have a BBU on the RAID controller, so no flushing
                 # necessary

This one too

         on serverB {
                 # /dev/sdc1 normal SATA disk
                 disk /dev/vg_vm_disks_A/vm_100_disk_root;
                 # this is a local disk without battery and cache

But this gives:
  $ drbdadm adjust vm-100-disk-root
  drbd.d/vm_100_disk_root.res:22: Parse error: 'disk | device | address |
         meta-disk | flexible-meta-disk' expected, but got 'no-disk-flushes

Hence drbd complains. I leave it to you to fin the correct syntax in the
8.4 conf manual.

So it seems this is the wrong syntax to describe what I want.

Can someone explain if it is possible to define different "disk-flushes"
options to different hosts/disks with another syntax?
If the answer is yes, how can I do this?
If the answer is no, is there a technical reason or simply "not required
now and therefore not implemented"?

drbd-user mailing list
drbd-user at lists.linbit.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20161217/c977acca/attachment.htm>

More information about the drbd-user mailing list