From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N5o9b-0004LD-M0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:16:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5DBD6E0954; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 22:16:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.netplus.ch (mx1.netplus.ch [213.221.143.230]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7E1E0954 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 22:16:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.17] (unknown [81.13.202.36]) (Authenticated sender: david.ulrich@siesa.ch) by mx1.netplus.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E1EA36F082B for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 23:16:32 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <058FB72E-F4BE-4931-ABDF-AA04E73FD12C@siesa.ch> From: David Ulrich To: "gentoo-cluster@lists.gentoo.org" In-Reply-To: <20091104211512.GA1145@orbis-terrarum.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (7D11) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-cluster@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-cluster@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 7D11) Subject: Re: [gentoo-cluster] clvm/lvm2/device-mapper Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 23:15:59 +0100 References: <20091019204229.GA3602@orbis-terrarum.net> <513ABDE2-C29F-40C6-895D-11C7B39BC5BB@siesa.ch> <7D5D86B6-1465-435B-8662-2C591ADE4F3F@siesa.ch> <20091104211512.GA1145@orbis-terrarum.net> X-Archives-Salt: 3b5e5ec3-abb7-4ca8-93b1-6851b7ab8b77 X-Archives-Hash: 5d9429798dd4c9ffe7bff02d7a7e9653 Le 4 nov. 2009 =C3=A0 22:15, "Robin H. Johnson" a =20= =C3=A9crit : > On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 09:32:49PM +0100, Ulrich David wrote: >> If I upgrade multipath to 0.4.8-r1 on a running system with mounted >> partitions (using multipath-0.4.7-r2) : > Can you boot with 0.4.8-r1 at all? > I'm just interested what disks turn up. My system is on one dual path SAN volume (sda,sdb). With 0.4.8-r1 sda1 =20= (/boot), sda2 (swap) and sda3 (/) are correctly mapped so I can boot. =20= But sda5 (/usr) and sda6 (/var) are not mapped... Mapping breaks at =20 sda4. So I don't have access to all I need (as /usr/lib for libaio, =20 parted, ...). Instead sda4 is mapped which doesn't contain any =20 filesystem (base extended partition). > > I'm trying to get some access to a SAN mounted space elsewhere to =20 > test, > so I can debug it further, should know later today if I can get =20 > access. > >> kpartx failed on mapping system4 which should be not mapped (I >> think, because its my extended base partition). The only thing which >> is changed is the addition of system4. > yeah, kpartx doesn't seem to be liking the extended partition, I'm not > 100% sure why yet, but it's beyond the udev rules I'm sure. > >> I hope this should help. If not I could mount a disk in my blades, >> install the system on the internal disk and try to mount a SAN >> volume on it with the same partition scheme. So I could better test >> it without boot problems. > If I can't get access to the test setup I wanted, I'll get back to you > on more detailed testing. If you cannot get access to a SAN I will see if I have time to do a =20 setup at work. David > > --=20 > Robin Hugh Johnson > Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead > E-Mail : robbat2@gentoo.org > GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85