Hello.
This is my opinion FWIW: there should be two bugs not one.
One wishlist bug for util-linux to implement -l for LVM and MD; if
the kernel needs an interface to implement this, then report a wishlist
bug for the Linux kernel to implement the required interface; so maybe
one day
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 26/01/15 14:51, Phillip Susi wrote:
> On 1/26/2015 7:34 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> The performance impact is not trivial. I have 28 LVs on my main
>> /dev/md and 47 on an external disk that is used to replicate
>> other filesystems. Both of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 1/26/2015 7:34 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> The performance impact is not trivial. I have 28 LVs on my main
> /dev/md and 47 on an external disk that is used to replicate other
> filesystems. Both of these disks make a horrible thrashing sound
>
On 26/01/15 13:21, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:36:02AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> On 26/01/15 10:32, Karel Zak wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 02:24:04AM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
>-l Create an exclusive flock(2) lock file
> (/run/fsck/.lock) f
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:36:02AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 26/01/15 10:32, Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 02:24:04AM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> >>>-l Create an exclusive flock(2) lock file
> >>> (/run/fsck/.lock) for whole-disk
> >>> devic
On 26/01/15 10:32, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 02:24:04AM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
>>>-l Create an exclusive flock(2) lock file
>>> (/run/fsck/.lock) for whole-disk
>>> device. This option can be used with one device only (this
>>> means that -
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 02:24:04AM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> >-l Create an exclusive flock(2) lock file
> > (/run/fsck/.lock) for whole-disk
> > device. This option can be used with one device only (this
> > means that -A and -l are
> > mutu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 26/01/15 02:24, Michael Biebl wrote:
> control: reassign -1 util-linux control: retitle -1 fsck -l does
> not work for stacked devices (MD, DM)
>
> Am 26.01.2015 um 02:17 schrieb Michael Biebl:
>
>> Might be, that util-linux's fsck -l does not
control: reassign -1 util-linux
control: retitle -1 fsck -l does not work for stacked devices (MD, DM)
Am 26.01.2015 um 02:17 schrieb Michael Biebl:
> Might be, that util-linux's fsck -l does not properly deal with LVM on
> top of software RAID.
>
> CCed Karel, maybe he can comment on this.
Oh
Am 23.01.2015 um 23:18 schrieb Josh Triplett:
> On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:44:57 +0100 Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> I have a server with many LVM logical volumes on top of the same RAID1
>> md device on two spindles.
>>
>> At boot, fsck appeared to be starting on many of the LVs simultaneously.
[..]
> sy
control: severity -1 important
Am 23.01.2015 um 07:44 schrieb Daniel Pocock:
> Package: systemd
> Version: 215-8
> Severity: serious
>
>
> I have a server with many LVM logical volumes on top of the same RAID1
> md device on two spindles.
>
> At boot, fsck appeared to be starting on many of the
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:44:57 +0100 Daniel Pocock wrote:
> I have a server with many LVM logical volumes on top of the same RAID1
> md device on two spindles.
>
> At boot, fsck appeared to be starting on many of the LVs simultaneously.
>
> There was a horrendous sound of disk head movement from t
Package: systemd
Version: 215-8
Severity: serious
I have a server with many LVM logical volumes on top of the same RAID1
md device on two spindles.
At boot, fsck appeared to be starting on many of the LVs simultaneously.
There was a horrendous sound of disk head movement from the server.
This
13 matches
Mail list logo
