FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-28-2008, 05:31 PM
"Eduardo Grosclaude"
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Hello,
My "hardware" (?) RAID system seems to work but says "duplicate PV" while booting, I don't think I was reading them before. Any clues will be appreciated.
From what I recall:

1) RAID 1 was setup (using firmware setup program) on a machine with Intel S3200 SHV Server Board.
2) Installed Centos 5.1, default LVM style. Anaconda saw a single 500GB disk so I assumed this was a true hardware RAID system. Am I wrong here?

3) Then wanted to reduce LogVol00 so as to make room for a new, data only filesystem on its own LV. Started by booting with rescue CD, lvscanned the disk, lvchanged -a y. Intended to resize root filesystem with resize2fs. Was asked to fsck, which I did (by the way, getting many errors). Fixed them all (fingers crossed), fsck again said ok. Then resize2fs worked happily.

4) Rebooted the installed system. Now "Duplicate PV" shows at boot. Honestly I don't know whether this was being displayed before (this is an inherited server). This message shows at the screen but no record of it is kept on any log file.

5) Everything seems to work well anyway. I created a new LV as I wished, just this message keeps me thinking...


Should I care? Should I fix it? Is it a true RAID board? Should I be better off going software-RAID 1?

lspci says
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation Server DRAM Controller
00:1a.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #4 (rev 02)

00:1a.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #5 (rev 02)
00:1a.2 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #6 (rev 02)
00:1a.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller #2 (rev 02)

00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) PCI Express Port 1 (rev 02)
00:1c.4 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) PCI Express Port 5 (rev 02)
00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #1 (rev 02)

00:1d.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #2 (rev 02)
00:1d.2 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #3 (rev 02)
00:1d.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller #1 (rev 02)

00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 PCI Bridge (rev 92)
00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation 82801IR (ICH9R) LPC Interface Controller (rev 02)
00:1f.2 RAID bus controller: Intel Corporation 82801 SATA RAID Controller (rev 02)

00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) SMBus Controller (rev 02)
02:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Matrox Graphics, Inc. MGA G200e [Pilot] ServerEngines (SEP1) (rev 02)
03:01.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82541PI Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 05)

03:02.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82541GI Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 05)


Thank you in advance

--
Eduardo Grosclaude
Universidad Nacional del Comahue
Neuquen, Argentina


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 05:39 PM
"Ross S. W. Walker"
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:
>
> Hello,
> My "hardware" (?) RAID system seems to work but says
> "duplicate PV" while booting, I don't think I was reading
> them before. Any clues will be appreciated.
> From what I recall:
> 1) RAID 1 was setup (using firmware setup program) on a
> machine with Intel S3200 SHV Server Board.
> 2) Installed Centos 5.1, default LVM style. Anaconda saw a
> single 500GB disk so I assumed this was a true hardware RAID
> system. Am I wrong here?
> 3) Then wanted to reduce LogVol00 so as to make room for a
> new, data only filesystem on its own LV. Started by booting
> with rescue CD, lvscanned the disk, lvchanged -a y. Intended
> to resize root filesystem with resize2fs. Was asked to fsck,
> which I did (by the way, getting many errors). Fixed them all
> (fingers crossed), fsck again said ok. Then resize2fs worked happily.
> 4) Rebooted the installed system. Now "Duplicate PV" shows at
> boot. Honestly I don't know whether this was being displayed
> before (this is an inherited server). This message shows at
> the screen but no record of it is kept on any log file.
> 5) Everything seems to work well anyway. I created a new LV
> as I wished, just this message keeps me thinking...
>
> Should I care? Should I fix it? Is it a true RAID board?
> Should I be better off going software-RAID 1?
>
> lspci says

More informative output would be:

# sfdisk -d
# pvs
# vgs

There might be a disk from an old RAID1 set in there.

-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 05:51 PM
"nate"
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:

> 4) Rebooted the installed system. Now "Duplicate PV" shows at boot. Honestly

To me it sounds likely that the raid controller is shitty and
is presenting two sets of devices to the OS, one likely being
the "RAID" device and the other a more generic device(s).

What does 'dmesg' say? Do you see more devices than you think
you should have on the system?

As long as LVM is using the "right" one, I think there shouldn't
be a problem. As another poster mentioned show your LVM configuration,
you may want to add a filter into /etc/lvm/lvm.conf to make sure it
uses the right one.

I've only seen this condition myself when:

1) Using multipathing software and multiple links to the same storage
(in which case I adjust lvm.conf to account for this)
2) snapshot a volume on an array and export it to the same host that
had the master(in which case I decided that wasn't the best way to
accomplish what I wanted).

nate


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 06:20 PM
Toby Bluhm
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Ross S. W. Walker wrote:

Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:
Hello,
My "hardware" (?) RAID system seems to work but says
"duplicate PV" while booting, I don't think I was reading



Could just be that lvm is finding your pv through another path -
lvm.conf can be setup to only scan specific devices.




There might be a disk from an old RAID1 set in there.



I'll second that. I forgot to zero out one of my disks from a test raid
setup & the when I rebooted for the 5.2 upgrade, lvm refused to start -
duplicate uuid - IIRC. 5.1 + updates didn't present the problem, so
something was changed in that regard for 5.2.


mdadm --examine <pv device(s)> will tell if there's raid metadata there,
--zero-superblock will erase it.




--
Toby Bluhm
Alltech Medical Systems America, Inc.
30825 Aurora Road Suite 100
Solon Ohio 44139
440-424-2240 ext203

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 06:22 PM
Toby Bluhm
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Toby Bluhm wrote:

Ross S. W. Walker wrote:

Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:
Hello, My "hardware" (?) RAID system seems to work but says



Never mind, mdadm don't apply with HW raid.




mdadm --examine <pv device(s)> will tell if there's raid metadata there,
--zero-superblock will erase it.







--
Toby Bluhm
Alltech Medical Systems America, Inc.
30825 Aurora Road Suite 100
Solon Ohio 44139
440-424-2240 ext203

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 06:29 PM
"Ross S. W. Walker"
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Toby Bluhm wrote:
> Toby Bluhm wrote:
> > Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> >> Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:
> >>> Hello, My "hardware" (?) RAID system seems to work but says
>
>
> Never mind, mdadm don't apply with HW raid.

Ah, but it would if a hardware RAID1 mirror were broken, a new
disk stuck in, then later the old disk was inserted into the
enclosure and it was presented as a regular disk...

Though he would need to determine if that is actually the case,
verify it is actually not part of any existing RAID set, then
remove it's LVM metadata.

If it is just a "fake" RAID not abstracting the physical disks
properly then he just needs to filter them out in lvm.conf.

Key is to make sure it isn't the "fake" RAID scenario or it
will have disastrous consequences.

-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 06:31 PM
"Eduardo Grosclaude"
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Ross, Nate, Tony, thanks for your promptly response

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:51 PM, nate <centos@linuxpowered.net> wrote:

Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:



> 4) Rebooted the installed system. Now "Duplicate PV" shows at boot. Honestly



To me it sounds likely that the raid controller is shitty and

is presenting two sets of devices to the OS, one likely being

the "RAID" device and the other a more generic device(s).



What does 'dmesg' say? Do you see more devices than you think

you should have on the system?dmesg says nothing about this, the message only appears at console when booting or otherwise using the PVs:

[root@myserver ~]# pvs
* Found duplicate PV 8D7K2wg15HqD0l9HxZCz7QlDfpqJOhXT: using /dev/sdb2 not /dev/sda2

* PV******** VG******** Fmt* Attr PSize** PFree
* /dev/sdb2* VolGroup00 lvm2 a-** 465,62G*** 0

[root@myserver ~]# lvs

* Found duplicate PV 8D7K2wg15HqD0l9HxZCz7QlDfpqJOhXT: using /dev/sdb2 not /dev/sda2

* LV****** VG******** Attr** LSize** Origin Snap%* Move Log Copy%

* LogVol00 VolGroup00 -wi-ao 150,00G*****************************

* LogVol01 VolGroup00 -wi-ao** 1,94G*****************************

* LogVol02 VolGroup00 -wi-ao 313,69G**


[root@myserver ~]# sfdisk -d
# tabla de particiones de /dev/sda
unit: sectors

/dev/sda1 : start=****** 63, size=** 208782, Id=83, bootable
/dev/sda2 : start=** 208845, size=976543155, Id=8e

/dev/sda3 : start=******* 0, size=******* 0, Id= 0
/dev/sda4 : start=******* 0, size=******* 0, Id= 0
# tabla de particiones de /dev/sdb
unit: sectors

/dev/sdb1 : start=****** 63, size=** 208782, Id=83, bootable

/dev/sdb2 : start=** 208845, size=976543155, Id=8e
/dev/sdb3 : start=******* 0, size=******* 0, Id= 0
/dev/sdb4 : start=******* 0, size=******* 0, Id= 0

Awful--I expected to see just one device :P

> There might be a disk from an old RAID1 set in there.

Don't think so, this machine was integrated here with new materials.


Oops... system-config-lvm shows under 'Uninitialized entities':
/dev/sda
**** -> part 1
**** -> part 2
**** -> unpartitioned space
/dev/sdb
**** -> part 1
**** -> unpartitioned space

These shouldn't be appearing as two discs in the first place-- but anaconda said I only had one unit...
Anyway, why the asymmetry? Did I screw the RAID volume somehow? Or did I install plain on sda and this RAID never worked as such? :P

The machine BIOS correctly describes the RAID volume at start. Doesn't It smell like fake RAID?
Should I declare sdb invalid to the firmware program so as to force resync?
Thanks again
--
Eduardo Grosclaude

Universidad Nacional del Comahue
Neuquen, Argentina


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 06:36 PM
Toby Bluhm
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:


Ross, Nate, Tony, thanks for your promptly response


Toby



On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:51 PM, nate <centos@linuxpowered.net
<mailto:centos@linuxpowered.net>> wrote:


Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:




snip




Oops... system-config-lvm shows under 'Uninitialized entities':
/dev/sda
-> part 1
-> part 2
-> unpartitioned space
/dev/sdb
-> part 1
-> unpartitioned space
These shouldn't be appearing as two discs in the first place-- but
anaconda said I only had one unit...
Anyway, why the asymmetry? Did I screw the RAID volume somehow? Or did I
install plain on sda and this RAID never worked as such? :P
The machine BIOS correctly describes the RAID volume at start. Doesn't
It smell like fake RAID?

Should I declare sdb invalid to the firmware program so as to force resync?
Thanks again



If it were me & I was just starting out on a new setup, I'd blow it all
away and start from scratch. I hate that nagging feeling something's
gonna bite me later down the road.




--
Toby Bluhm
Alltech Medical Systems America, Inc.
30825 Aurora Road Suite 100
Solon Ohio 44139
440-424-2240 ext203

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 06:43 PM
"Eduardo Grosclaude"
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Toby Bluhm <tkb@midwestinstruments.com> wrote:

Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:




Ross, Nate, Tony, thanks for your promptly response




TobyOuch! Excuse me plz


If it were me & I was just starting out on a new setup, I'd blow it all away and start from scratch. I hate that nagging feeling something's gonna bite me later down the road.Agreed, I just expected to get a bit more knowledge from this crappy situation

Cheers
--
Eduardo Grosclaude
Universidad Nacional del Comahue
Neuquen, Argentina


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 07:17 PM
"Ross S. W. Walker"
 
Default Duplicate PV on HW RAID?

Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:
>
> Ross, Nate, Tony, thanks for your promptly response
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:51 PM, nate <centos@linuxpowered.net> wrote:
>
>
> Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:
>
> > 4) Rebooted the installed system. Now "Duplicate PV"
> shows at boot. Honestly
>
>
> To me it sounds likely that the raid controller is shitty and
> is presenting two sets of devices to the OS, one likely being
> the "RAID" device and the other a more generic device(s).
>
> What does 'dmesg' say? Do you see more devices than you think
> you should have on the system?
>
> dmesg says nothing about this, the message only appears at
> console when booting or otherwise using the PVs:
>
> [root@myserver ~]# pvs
> Found duplicate PV 8D7K2wg15HqD0l9HxZCz7QlDfpqJOhXT: using
> /dev/sdb2 not /dev/sda2
> PV VG Fmt Attr PSize PFree
> /dev/sdb2 VolGroup00 lvm2 a- 465,62G 0
>
> [root@myserver ~]# lvs
> Found duplicate PV 8D7K2wg15HqD0l9HxZCz7QlDfpqJOhXT: using
> /dev/sdb2 not /dev/sda2
> LV VG Attr LSize Origin Snap% Move Log Copy%
> LogVol00 VolGroup00 -wi-ao 150,00G
> LogVol01 VolGroup00 -wi-ao 1,94G
> LogVol02 VolGroup00 -wi-ao 313,69G
>
>
> [root@myserver ~]# sfdisk -d
> # tabla de particiones de /dev/sda
> unit: sectors
>
> /dev/sda1 : start= 63, size= 208782, Id=83, bootable
> /dev/sda2 : start= 208845, size=976543155, Id=8e
> /dev/sda3 : start= 0, size= 0, Id= 0
> /dev/sda4 : start= 0, size= 0, Id= 0
> # tabla de particiones de /dev/sdb
> unit: sectors
>
> /dev/sdb1 : start= 63, size= 208782, Id=83, bootable
> /dev/sdb2 : start= 208845, size=976543155, Id=8e
> /dev/sdb3 : start= 0, size= 0, Id= 0
> /dev/sdb4 : start= 0, size= 0, Id= 0
>
> Awful--I expected to see just one device :P
>
> > There might be a disk from an old RAID1 set in there.
> Don't think so, this machine was integrated here with new materials.
>
> Oops... system-config-lvm shows under 'Uninitialized entities':
> /dev/sda
> -> part 1
> -> part 2
> -> unpartitioned space
> /dev/sdb
> -> part 1
> -> unpartitioned space

The sfdisk output looks OK, I think it's just an issue with
system-config-lvm getting confused with the "leaky" sdb.

> These shouldn't be appearing as two discs in the first
> place-- but anaconda said I only had one unit...
> Anyway, why the asymmetry? Did I screw the RAID volume
> somehow? Or did I install plain on sda and this RAID never
> worked as such? :P

I think it's the on board RAID not abstracting the disks as
it should.

> The machine BIOS correctly describes the RAID volume at
> start. Doesn't It smell like fake RAID?
> Should I declare sdb invalid to the firmware program so as to
> force resync?

You could re-try the installation, or, hide /dev/sdb from lvm
using filtering in lvm.conf.

You can reboot with a live cd and run a checksum comparison
on the volumes on each disk to verify if the RAID is working
correctly. Maybe there is a BIOS option to hide drive 2?

If you do a re-install and get the same result then you know
it wasn't a mistake on your part though (unless you make it
again!).

-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:53 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org