Description of problem: I'm not sure this is actually a bug, but is this warning demanding the user check the lvm.conf file or suggesting it as an option? Like, should it be "(check archiving *if* needed in lvm.conf)" [root@hayes-01 ~]# ls -l /etc/lvm/archive/ | wc -l 2222 [root@hayes-01 ~]# lvremove -f vdo_sanity Consider pruning vdo_sanity VG archive with more then 892 MiB in 2171 files (check archiving is needed in lvm.conf). Logical volume "vdo_lv" successfully removed. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): lvm2-2.03.14-6.el8 BUILT: Fri Jul 29 05:40:53 CDT 2022 lvm2-libs-2.03.14-6.el8 BUILT: Fri Jul 29 05:40:53 CDT 2022
Please provide better wording if there is one. The first part if this hint message: Consider pruning vdo_sanity VG archive with more then 892 MiB in 2171 files describes a problem with hint how to solve it - that either too many files are considered to be in the '/etc/lvm/archive' directory or too large size of archives - or both. The second part: (check archiving is needed in lvm.conf). describes possible 'long-term' solution for such user - if he is generating way too many 'archived' metadata he might get better performance if such stream of archiving is actually disabled. Since typically this massive load of archived volume groups metadata set is on testing machines where many randomly generated VG names are created. Lvm2 tracks history size for individual VGs - but if each VG is using different random name - then over the time the amount of collected files may slowdown even lvm command itself (which tries to maintain this history)
Right, I totally understand both the first and second part. The second part, when I read it, I thought the "is" was a typo for "if". Like, if this continues to be an issue the user is seeing, then "check archiving in lvm.conf". However, having "check archiving IS needed in lvm.conf" reads like there's a problem that needs to be dealt with, which isn't necessarily the case if you just clean up the dir. I think "(check archiving in lvm.conf if this continues to be an issue)." would read better. However this isn't a big deal either way.
Upstreamed this message update: https://listman.redhat.com/archives/lvm-devel/2023-February/024555.html
Marking Verified:Tested in the latest rpms. kernel-5.14.0-322.el9 BUILT: Fri Jun 2 10:00:53 AM CEST 2023 lvm2-2.03.21-2.el9 BUILT: Thu May 25 12:03:04 AM CEST 2023 lvm2-libs-2.03.21-2.el9 BUILT: Thu May 25 12:03:04 AM CEST 2023 [root@grant-01 ~]# ls -l /etc/lvm/archive/ | wc -l 18328 [root@grant-01 ~]# lvremove -f snapper Consider pruning snapper VG archive with more then 223 MiB in 14807 files (see archiving settings in lvm.conf). Consider pruning snapper VG archive with more then 223 MiB in 14808 files (see archiving settings in lvm.conf). Logical volume "boom_snap" successfully removed. Logical volume "origin" successfully removed.