On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 05:00:51PM -0500, J.R. Lillard wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Lars Ellenberg
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 02:38:07PM -0500, J.R. Lillard wrote:
> > > Witnessed another bandwidth spike that slowed my stacked layer down.
> > >
> > > 10: cs:Connected ro:Pr
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 05:00:51PM -0500, J.R. Lillard wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Lars Ellenberg
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 02:38:07PM -0500, J.R. Lillard wrote:
> > > > Witnessed another bandwidth spike tha
On 2012-06-29T11:23:09, Phil Frost wrote:
> >Jun 29 12:34:53 ss2 LVM[2386]: INFO: 0 logical volume(s) in volume
> >group "storage" now active
> Looks like your problem is right there. The LVM RA considers
> starting the VG as failed if the VG doesn't contain any LVs.
I really wish someone had a
On Jul 3, 2012, at 10:17 AM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2012-06-29T11:23:09, Phil Frost wrote:
>
>>> Jun 29 12:34:53 ss2 LVM[2386]: INFO: 0 logical volume(s) in volume
>>> group "storage" now active
>> Looks like your problem is right there. The LVM RA considers
>> starting the VG as failed
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2012-06-29T11:23:09, Phil Frost wrote:
>
>> >Jun 29 12:34:53 ss2 LVM[2386]: INFO: 0 logical volume(s) in volume
>> >group "storage" now active
>> Looks like your problem is right there. The LVM RA considers
>> starting the VG as faile
Hi,
maybe I do have some misunderstanding, but:
On 03.07.2012 19:33, Florian Haas wrote:
> The very notion that we're "activating" a whole VG made Alasdair
> cringe last time I talked to him, and rightly so, because it's not
> meaningful as only LVs can really be "active" or "inactive". Of
> cour
I should give some additional information.
We build a two-node cluster with drbd. The following is the configuration.
resource drbd1 {
protocol A;
on host41 {
device /dev/drbd0 minor 0;
disk /dev/vgdrbd/oracle;
address
