http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 Holger Sickenberg changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P5 - None |P3 - Medium Assignee|ha-bugs@suse.de |ygao@suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 Yan Gao changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lwang@suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c3 Kristoffer Gronlund changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CONFIRMED --- Comment #3 from Kristoffer Gronlund --- (In reply to Liuhua Wang from comment #2)

(In reply to Yan Gao from comment #1)

...

Do you mean ocf:heartbeawt:LVM RA? I think it depends, since this RA can be used in non-clvm case too. If we'd like to check for this, probably we should check if the volume group has cluster tag? Kristoffer may have a better idea ;-) ocf:heartbeawt:LVM RA is just activating VGs, I think it is ocf:heartbeat:clvm RA that was mentioned.

Kristoffer, since in clustered environment lvmetad is not supported, how about add a line to modify /etc/lvm/lvm.conf and set use_lvmetad = 0 and locking_type = 3? I had thought it is that way, but I check RA source, it is not.

Sure! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c5 --- Comment #5 from Yan Gao --- (In reply to Liuhua Wang from comment #2)

(In reply to Yan Gao from comment #1)

...

Do you mean ocf:heartbeawt:LVM RA? I think it depends, since this RA can be used in non-clvm case too. If we'd like to check for this, probably we should check if the volume group has cluster tag? Kristoffer may have a better idea ;-) ocf:heartbeawt:LVM RA is just activating VGs, I think it is ocf:heartbeat:clvm RA that was mentioned.

Kristoffer, since in clustered environment lvmetad is not supported, how about add a line to modify /etc/lvm/lvm.conf and set use_lvmetad = 0 and locking_type = 3? I had thought it is that way, but I check RA source, it is not. It seems good enough to just drop an error message and return OCF_ERR_CONFIGURED for me. Not sure if it's a good idea to modify users' configuration.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c7 --- Comment #7 from Kristoffer Gronlund --- To be clear: ocf:heartbeat:clvm should be modified to check if use_lvmetad is set, and if so generate an error. Should ocf:heartbeat:LVM also check this? I guess not? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c9 --- Comment #9 from Yan Gao --- (In reply to Kristoffer Gronlund from comment #7)

To be clear:

ocf:heartbeat:clvm should be modified to check if use_lvmetad is set, and if so generate an error. Hmm, I see the following in ocf:heartbeat:clvm:

# autoset locking type to clusted when lvmconf tool is available if [ -x "$LVMCONF" ]; then $LVMCONF --enable-cluster > /dev/null 2>&1 fi According to the manual of lvmconf: --enable-cluster Set locking_type to the default clustered type on this system. Also disable lvmetad use as it is not yet supported in clustered environment. So, it doesn't actually work? or only under some conditions?

Should ocf:heartbeat:LVM also check this? I guess not?

I don't think so. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c11 --- Comment #11 from Kristoffer Gronlund --- (In reply to Yan Gao from comment #9)

(In reply to Kristoffer Gronlund from comment #7)

...

To be clear:

ocf:heartbeat:clvm should be modified to check if use_lvmetad is set, and if so generate an error. Hmm, I see the following in ocf:heartbeat:clvm:

# autoset locking type to clusted when lvmconf tool is available if [ -x "$LVMCONF" ]; then $LVMCONF --enable-cluster > /dev/null 2>&1 fi

According to the manual of lvmconf:

--enable-cluster Set locking_type to the default clustered type on this system. Also disable lvmetad use as it is not yet supported in clustered environment.

So, it doesn't actually work? or only under some conditions?

Oh, I wasn't aware of that. Well, then the fix (if any) should be to fix lvmconf if it doesn't work. I'll retract my submit request then, no change to the resource agent should be necessary.

...

Should ocf:heartbeat:LVM also check this? I guess not?

I don't think so.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c13 --- Comment #13 from Kristoffer Gronlund --- It seems that lvmconf --enable-cluster makes the additional functionality in yast added in bsc#955564 not necessary as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c15 --- Comment #15 from Kristoffer Gronlund --- (In reply to Liuhua Wang from comment #14)

`lvmconf --enable-cluster` works well. In ocf:heartbeat:clvm which belongs to resource-agents package, it includes this logic, but SUSE is using ocf:lvm2:clvm/cmirrord which belongs to lvm2 package instead of resource-agents.

@Yan, @Kristoffo, do you know why we are using our own clvmd and cmirrord instead of RA upstream? I have no idea why we did not use those from upstream.

No, I don't know why. Is there a difference in functionality? Maybe we should switch to use the RA upstream. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c17 --- Comment #17 from Liuhua Wang --- (In reply to Kristoffer Gronlund from comment #15) No, I don't know why. Is there a difference in functionality? Maybe we should switch to use the RA upstream. There are several minor points that are different: 1.parameter default values different: SUSE: </parameters> <actions> <action name="start" timeout="90" /> <action name="stop" timeout="100" /> <action name="monitor" timeout="20" depth="0"/> <action name="meta-data" timeout="5" /> <action name="validate-all" timeout="30" /> </actions> Upstream: <actions> <action name="start" timeout="90" /> <action name="stop" timeout="90" /> <action name="monitor" timeout="90" interval="30" depth="0" /> <action name="reload" timeout="90" /> <action name="meta-data" timeout="10" /> <action name="validate-all" timeout="20" /> </actions> @Gaoyan: It is ok we keep the same with upstream or keep ours own? 2. cmirrod start or not SUSE: start cmirrord when starting clvmd Upstream: not start cmirrord by default (with-cmirrord is false) I don't see any necessities to start cmirrord with clvm since the user may not use mirrored lv in cluster-lvm. So I think it is ok to keep the same with Upstream. 3. whether activate all the VGs during start action SUSE: no Upstream: activate all the VGs when start clvmd daemon I think it is ok to keep the same with Upstream. If VGs are activated in starting clvmd, then next step of activation by ocf:heartbeat:LVM still will return SUCCESS. (In reply to Yan Gao from comment #16)

As far as I can see, ocf:heartbeat:clvm was introduced by David Vossel in 2014. While we've been shipping ocf:lvm2:clvm since 2008, but without proposing it to resource-agents upstream. Thanks for the information.

Yes, it'd probably make sense to switch to ocf:heartbeat:clvm in our documentation and crmsh templates.

BTW, please notice ocf:heartbeat:clvm has "with_cmirrord" parameter which defaults to false.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c19 Liuhua Wang changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|kgronlund@suse.com |taroth@suse.com --- Comment #19 from Liuhua Wang --- I think it is better to still keep ocf:lvm2:clvmd/cmirrord for old customers in lvm2 package(already bug fixed ). And in order to move to upstream RA what should we do is only to modify the doc of sle12-sp2 to let users to use ocf:heartbeat:clvmd(no cmirrord in upstream because it is started by clvmd if needed) instead of ocf:lvm2:clvmd. So I reassign this bug to Tanya. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c20 --- Comment #20 from Yan Gao --- (In reply to Liuhua Wang from comment #19)

I think it is better to still keep ocf:lvm2:clvmd/cmirrord for old customers in lvm2 package(already bug fixed ) Ah, yes. It makes sense to let ocf:lvm2:clvmd invoke lvmconf to do the same as well.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c21 --- Comment #21 from Kristoffer Gronlund --- (In reply to Yan Gao from comment #9)

(In reply to Kristoffer Gronlund from comment #7)

...

To be clear:

ocf:heartbeat:clvm should be modified to check if use_lvmetad is set, and if so generate an error. Hmm, I see the following in ocf:heartbeat:clvm:

# autoset locking type to clusted when lvmconf tool is available if [ -x "$LVMCONF" ]; then $LVMCONF --enable-cluster > /dev/null 2>&1 fi

According to the manual of lvmconf:

--enable-cluster Set locking_type to the default clustered type on this system. Also disable lvmetad use as it is not yet supported in clustered environment.

So, it doesn't actually work? or only under some conditions?

...

Should ocf:heartbeat:LVM also check this? I guess not?

I don't think so.

It turns out that on SLES, LVMCONF is never called by ocf:heartbeat:clvm, because we install lvmconf to /sbin and not /usr/sbin so the resource agent can't find it. The fix would be either to patch the resource agent so it looks in the right location, or to move lvmconf to /usr/sbin. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 Kristoffer Gronlund changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- See Also| |http://bugzilla.suse.com/sh | |ow_bug.cgi?id=980753 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970439#c25 Tanja Roth changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #25 from Tanja Roth --- Was fixed in the docs as part of https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1030841. Closing. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.