On 8/11/06 1:01 PM, "Greg Freemyer"
On 8/11/06, Ian Marlier
wrote: On 8/11/06 12:24 PM, "Greg Freemyer"
wrote: All,
I had an air conditioner go out yesterday and a suse 10.1 based fileserver got shutdown non-gracefully.
Today, one of my LVM virtual partitions is not working (Yes, I have a backup from the previous night, but I hope not to need it.)
A quick look at "/dev/<my-lvm-domain>/* shows that one of the links to /dev/mapper/* that should be there is missing. ie. 2 are present and the corresponding filesystems are mounting fine. The 3rd is missing and it obviously will not mount.
The missing link is /dev/<my-lvm-domain>/data
I would simply recreate it, but looking at /dev/mapper I'm surprised to find 2 entries that could be my lvm partition: /dev/mapper/<my-lvm-domain>-data /dev/mapper/<my-lvm-domain>-data-real
Is it safe for me to simply try creating a link for -data then issueing a mount command?
Same symptoms I'm seeing, with a snapshot!
If you do a mount on /dev/mapper/<my-lv-domain>-data, does that work?
What about the /dev/mapper/<my-lv-domain>-data-real?
Does fsck pass on either/both of them, or does it fail to read the filesystem?
Thanks for the idea to try a mount.
I tried a readonly mount of -data and it failed (no superblock).
A readonly mount of -data-real works, so I will recreate the link pointing to that.
Hmm...glad that worked. After re-creating the symlink, you might want to try doing a clean reboot of the machine; I'm not sure, but I think that those links are created dynamically at boot time so yours may not persist across a reboot of the machine. (This also makes it possible, at least, that having a manually-created symlink in there will break something -- you might want to have a rescue disk handy as well.) I've never managed to get a clear sense of whether the dynamic creation is done by udev, or by something else. The files in /etc/udev/rules.d don't refer to LVM specifically, though they do somehow interact with LVM in order to create the /dev/dm-X devices...suffice it to say that it's something that I'm trying to figure out, in reference to my own issue posted a little earlier today :-) - Ian