Description of problem: The help says that with '--alloc anywhere' I should be allowed to have a 1 or 2 PV mirror, but that appears to not be the case: Two PV case: [root@link-11 ~]# pvscan PV /dev/sdc1 VG VG_2 lvm2 [517.64 GB / 517.64 GB free] PV /dev/sdd1 VG VG_2 lvm2 [517.64 GB / 517.64 GB free] PV /dev/sda1 VG VG_1 lvm2 [517.65 GB / 517.65 GB free] PV /dev/sdb1 VG VG_1 lvm2 [517.64 GB / 517.64 GB free] Total: 4 [2.02 TB] / in use: 4 [2.02 TB] / in no VG: 0 [0 ] [root@link-11 ~]# vgscan Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while... Found volume group "VG_2" using metadata type lvm2 Found volume group "VG_1" using metadata type lvm2 [root@link-11 ~]# lvcreate -m 1 -L 400G VG_1 -n mirror1 --alloc anywhere Insufficient suitable allocatable extents for logical volume : 204800 more required [root@link-11 ~]# lvcreate -m 1 -L 40G VG_1 -n mirror1 --alloc anywhere Insufficient suitable allocatable extents for logical volume : 20480 more required [root@link-11 ~]# lvcreate -m 1 -L 4G VG_1 -n mirror1 --alloc anywhere Insufficient suitable allocatable extents for logical volume : 2048 more required One PV case: [root@link-11 ~]# vgcreate VG /dev/sda1 Volume group "VG" successfully created [root@link-11 ~]# lvcreate -m 1 -n mirror1 --alloc anywhere -L 4G VG Insufficient suitable allocatable extents for logical volume : 2048 more required Three PV case: [root@link-11 ~]# vgcreate VG /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 Volume group "VG" successfully created [root@link-11 ~]# lvcreate -m 1 -n mirror1 --alloc anywhere -L 4G VG Logical volume "mirror1" created [root@link-11 ~]# lvscan ACTIVE '/dev/VG/mirror1' [4.00 GB] anywhere ACTIVE '/dev/VG/mirror1_mlog' [4.00 MB] anywhere ACTIVE '/dev/VG/mirror1_mimage_0' [4.00 GB] inherit ACTIVE '/dev/VG/mirror1_mimage_1' [4.00 GB] inherit Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): [root@link-11 ~]# rpm -qa | grep lvm2 lvm2-2.01.13-1.0.RHEL4 lvm2-cluster-2.01.09-4.0.RHEL4 How reproducible: everytime
That functionality hasn't been implemented yet.
(low priority because, for performance reasons, it is not a sensible configuration)
*** Bug 180442 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Moving for consideration to RHEL4.5.
*** Bug 205829 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Patch and test case posted on linux-lvm: https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-lvm/2006-September/msg00108.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-lvm/2006-August/msg00116.html
Another set of patches in lvm-devel: https://www.redhat.com/archives/lvm-devel/2006-October/msg00030.html
What is the status of the above patches?
Re: comment#12 Dave, They're not accepted in upstream.
Patch set proposed for BZ#204127 should fix this problem too.
I've tested with the patches for BZ#204127 and found them to fix this bug.
Bug was closed because it didn't make 4.5. Alasdair Kergon opened it again stating we plan to do it in 4.6.
This bugzilla had previously been approved for engineering consideration but Red Hat Product Management is currently reevaluating this issue for inclusion in RHEL4.6.
This request was previously evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release, but Red Hat was unable to resolve it in time. This request will be reviewed for a future Red Hat Enterprise Linux release.
Missed RHEL4.7 and dies not meet the criteria of 4.8 (hardware enablement). Likely to be closed as WONTFIX for RHEL4.