Re: LVM2 Metadata structure, extents ordering, metadata corruptions
Gionatan Danti <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.lvm.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Il 2022-09-27 12:10 Roberto Fastec ha scritto: > questions > 1. Given the premise 3. The corresponding LVM2 metadata/tables are and > will be just a (allow me the term) "grid" "mapping that space" in an > ordered sequence to in the subsequent use (and filling) of the RAID > space "just mark" the used ones and the free ones? Or those grid cells > will/could be in a messed order ? Classical linear LVM volume (read: not lvmthin) are mostly concatenated 4MB-sized chunk of space, but this is not a given (especially if some volumes changed in size). > And explicitly I mean. In case of metadata corruption (always with > respect of premise 3.) , could we just generate a dummy metadata table > with all the extents marked as "used" in such a way that we can anyway > access them For linear volumes, one can try to setup a dmtable (or dummy metadata) to linearly read the data but, as stated above, this is far from reliable. > 2. Does it exist a sort of "fsck" for the LVM2 metadata ? We do > technical assistance and recently, specifically with those NAS devices > that make use of LVM2, we have experienced really easy metadata > corruption in occurence of just nothing or because of a electric power > interruption (which is really astonishing). We mean no drives failures > , no bad SMARTs . Just corruption from "nowhere" and "nocause" For classical LVM, the metadata are actually backed up in ascii format unser /etc/lvm. While LVM itself keep a binary metadata representation, it also accept/store the textual so you can use the latter to restore your volumes. Do you notice how I explicitly talked about *classical* volumes? This is because thin volumes (man lvmthin) use completely different, and much more complex, allocation strategies. Losing such metadata would kill the entire thin pool, and this is the reason a backup metadata volume is required for some operations. thincheck is effectively a sort ot "lvmthin fsck", but if you ever need to use it, be prepared to data loss (ranging from small to massive). I saw various NAS that used custom-patched lvmthin volumes, and I suppose this is the root of your issues. If it is acceptable for your workload, try using classical LVM on these NAS. Regards. -- Danti Gionatan Supporto Tecnico Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it email: [email protected] - [email protected] GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8 _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list [email protected] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/