Bug 130300
Summary: | mounting gfs readonly can fail due to error recovering journal | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Cluster Suite | Reporter: | Corey Marthaler <cmarthal> |
Component: | gfs | Assignee: | Ken Preslan <kpreslan> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | GFS Bugs <gfs-bugs> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 3 | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | i686 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2004-08-19 16:24:39 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Corey Marthaler
2004-08-18 21:30:10 UTC
1) Are you trying to mount the same filesystem into two different lockspaces? If so... what are you expecting to happen? Are you deliberately trying to cause corruption and/or panics? For example, on node1: mount -t gfs /dev/pool/pool0 /gfs -o locktable=cluster:foo and on node 2: mount -t gfs /dev/pool/pool0 /gfs -o locktable=cluster:bar 2) What do you expect GFS to do when it encounters a journal in need of repair when told to mount read-only? If it modifies the filesystem, it really isn't read-only at that point (and arguably a bug). Perhaps remounting the filesystem readonly after the journal has been replayed is what you are after? e.g.: mount -o remount,ro /gfs In which case, I don't know what would happen if a read-write node crashes and the read-only node trys to recover. Hopefully it would fail to replay the journal and allow another a node to retry. I was trying to mount the same filesystem into two different lockspaces just to see that the locktable flag worked knowing that I might corrupt my data. But that's a different "I have a loaded gun pointed at my foot" issue. :) I guess this isn't really a bug then as that is the expected behavior if the journal needs to be replayed. It's just that the error given was a little scarey. :( But if one looks in the log, it's clear what happened. |