1 |
Giacomo Bagnoli <g.bagnoli@××××××.com> 2009-05-18 12:27: |
2 |
> Hi all, |
3 |
> this is my first message here, I did a quick search on google but I did |
4 |
> not found the answers I'm looking for. |
5 |
> I'm trying to setup (well, right now I am experimenting :) ) a 2 node |
6 |
> cluster with drbd-shared storage using 64bit profile on 2 intel xeon |
7 |
> servers. I've successfully setup drbd 8 in primary-primary using an lvm |
8 |
> LV as drbd disk with ocfs2 (that's it, drbd over lvm). |
9 |
> Now I'm trying to do the opposite, lvm over a drbd device, using drbd1 |
10 |
> as a PV for a lvm VG. If I've understood the problem correctly I need |
11 |
> clvm to manage active-active configuration to avoid metadata corruption |
12 |
> when managing LVs. |
13 |
> This shared PV is not the system PV I use for the node OS, it's on |
14 |
> another disk that i plan to share directly via drbd. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> What confuses me is the presence of sys-fs/clvm and sys-fs/lvm2 with |
17 |
> clvm and cman use flags. |
18 |
> I've installed sys-fs/lvm2-2.0.45, when trying to install clvm I get |
19 |
> blockers (device-mapper and lvm2 itself). |
20 |
> sys-fs/lvm2 clvm and cman use flags are profile masked on amd64 (but |
21 |
> not on x86), why? |
22 |
> Should I need to downgrade lvm2 and install clvm or do it's safe to try |
23 |
> out unmasking those use flags by overriding the profile (I'm using |
24 |
> paludis and already have a custom profile that inherit from |
25 |
> amd64/2008.0/server)? |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Thanks in advance, |
28 |
> Giacomo |
29 |
|
30 |
I remember looking at this a while ago as well and being fairly |
31 |
confused. I'm fairly certain that lvm2 with the use flags you mention |
32 |
is the way to go, so you might have to unmask them in your |
33 |
/etc/portage/profile/use.mask (add -clvm, -cman). |
34 |
|
35 |
OCFS2 generally uses it's own different cluster stack than CMAN (which |
36 |
uses openais). Since I believe 2.6.26 you can use the other one, but I |
37 |
haven't found it to be as stable. It also requires quite a bit of extra |
38 |
configuration for proper fencing, whereas that's built into the OCFS2 |
39 |
stack. Since you're doing this with DRBD it sounds like you're trying |
40 |
to do it on the cheap so proper fencing probably isn't available |
41 |
anyways. |
42 |
|
43 |
If you aren't doing anything with LVM that needs to be cluster aware |
44 |
(eg: just a concatenation of multiple PVs, no striping) then it should |
45 |
be just fine without CLVM. The key is that you /must/ take all but one |
46 |
node offline (umount; vgchange -an) before you do any LVM operations |
47 |
such as adding more extents, else they'll have an inconsistent view of |
48 |
the VGs/LVs. This also isn't technically supported but I've run it |
49 |
without problems for a year or so now. |
50 |
|
51 |
Brian |