This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --jRwgP1nGWsjExEUgLS6FSLvHqevHtQK23 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue Mar 4 14:46:33 2014, Nir Soffer wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nir Soffer" <nsoffer@redhat.com> To: "Boyan Tabakov" <blade@alslayer.net> Cc: users@ovirt.org, "Zdenek Kabelac" <zkabelac@redhat.com> Sent: Monday, March 3, 2014 9:39:47 PM Subject: Re: [Users] SD Disk's Logical Volume not visible/activated on= some nodes
Hi Zdenek, can you look into this strange incident?
When user creates a disk on one host (create a new lv), the lv is not = seen on another host in the cluster.
Calling multipath -r cause the new lv to appear on the other host.
Finally, lvs tell us that vg_mda_free is zero - maybe unrelated, but u= nusual.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Boyan Tabakov" <blade@alslayer.net> To: "Nir Soffer" <nsoffer@redhat.com> Cc: users@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, March 3, 2014 9:51:05 AM Subject: Re: [Users] SD Disk's Logical Volume not visible/activated o= n some nodes
>>> Consequently, when creating/booting >>> a VM with the said disk attached, the VM fails to start on host= 2, >>> because host2 can't see the LV. Similarly, if the VM is started= on >>> host1, it fails to migrate to host2. Extract from host2 log is = in >>> the >>> end. The LV in question is 6b35673e-7062-4716-a6c8-d5bf72fe3280= =2E >>> >>> As far as I could track quickly the vdsm code, there is only ca= ll to >>> lvs >>> and not to lvscan or lvchange so the host2 LVM doesn't fully >>> refresh.
lvs should see any change on the shared storage.
>>> The only workaround so far has been to restart VDSM on host2, w= hich >>> makes it refresh all LVM data properly.
When vdsm starts, it calls multipath -r, which ensure that we see al= l physical volumes.
>>> >>> When is host2 supposed to pick up any newly created LVs in the = SD >>> VG? >>> Any suggestions where the problem might be? >> >> When you create a new lv on the shared storage, the new lv shoul= d be >> visible on the other host. Lets start by verifying that you do s= ee >> the new lv after a disk was created. >> >> Try this: >> >> 1. Create a new disk, and check the disk uuid in the engine ui >> 2. On another machine, run this command: >> >> lvs -o vg_name,lv_name,tags >> >> You can identify the new lv using tags, which should contain the= new >> disk >> uuid. >> >> If you don't see the new lv from the other host, please provide >> /var/log/messages >> and /var/log/sanlock.log. > > Just tried that. The disk is not visible on the non-SPM node.
This means that storage is not accessible from this host.
Generally, the storage seems accessible ok. For example, if I resta= rt the vdsmd, all volumes get picked up correctly (become visible in l= vs output and VMs can be started with them).
Lests repeat this test, but now, if you do not see the new lv, pleas= e run:
multipath -r
And report the results.
Running multipath -r helped and the disk was properly picked up by th= e second host.
Is running multipath -r safe while host is not in maintenance mode?
It should be safe, vdsm uses in some cases.
If yes, as a temporary workaround I can patch vdsmd to run multipath = -r when e.g. monitoring the storage domain.
I suggested running multipath as debugging aid; normally this is not n= eeded.
You should see lv on the shared storage without running multipath.
Zdenek, can you explain this?
One warning that I keep seeing in vdsm logs on both nodes is this:
Thread-1617881::WARNING::2014-02-24 16:57:50,627::sp::1553::Storage.StoragePool::(getInfo) VG 3307f6fa-dd58-43db-ab23-b1fb299006c7's metadata size exceeded critical size: mdasize=3D134217728 mdafree=3D0
Can you share the output of the command bellow?
lvs -o uuid,name,attr,size,free,extent_size,extent_count,free_count,tag= s,vg_mda_size,vg_mda_free,lv_count,pv_count,pv_name
Here's the output for both hosts.
host1: [root@host1 ~]# lvs -o uuid,name,attr,size,vg_free,vg_extent_size,vg_extent_count,vg_free_co= unt,tags,vg_mda_size,vg_mda_free,lv_count,pv_count LV UUID LV Attr LSize VFree Ext #Ext Free LV Tags
VMdaSize VMdaFree #LV #PV jGEpVm-oPW8-XyxI-l2yi-YF4X-qteQ-dm8SqL 3d362bf2-20f4-438d-9ba9-486bd2e8cedf -wi-ao--- 2.00g 114.62g 128.00= m 1596 917 IU_0227da98-34b2-4b0c-b083-d42e7b760036,MD_5,PU_f4231952-76c5-4764-9c= 8b-ac73492ac465 128.00m 0 13 2
This looks wrong - your vg_mda_free is zero - as vdsm complains.
Zdenek, how can we debug this further?
I see same issue in Fedora 19.
Can you share with us the output of:
cat /etc/redhat-release uname -a lvm version
Nir
$ cat /etc/redhat-release Fedora release 19 (Schr=C3=B6dinger=E2=80=99s Cat) $ uname -a Linux blizzard.mgmt.futurice.com 3.12.6-200.fc19.x86_64.debug #1 SMP=20 Mon Dec 23 16:24:32 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ lvm version LVM version: 2.02.98(2) (2012-10-15) Library version: 1.02.77 (2012-10-15) Driver version: 4.26.0 --jRwgP1nGWsjExEUgLS6FSLvHqevHtQK23 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlMV2tUACgkQXOXFG4fgV75tWgCcDmmo/rkdRNmPuXgfGrMN4VIJ 7z8An0LrJa0bhyS9tLVaqz6U30rM6A+p =41Ax -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jRwgP1nGWsjExEUgLS6FSLvHqevHtQK23--