Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2003 08:54 PM
10-27-2003 08:54 PM
Any idea ? why ? what was wrong with that ?
------
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: Performed a switch for Lun ID = 0 (pv = 0x0cf76400), from raw device 0x1c040000 (with priority: 0, and current flags: 0x240) to raw device 0x1c011000 (with priority: 1, and current flags: 0x0).
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: Performed a switch for Lun ID = 0 (pv = 0x0cf76400), from raw device 0x1c040000 (with priority: 0, and current flags: 0x240) to raw device 0x1c011000 (with priority: 1, and current flags: 0x0).
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: vg[2]: pvnum=0 (dev_t=0x1c011000) is POWERFAILED
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: vg[2]: pvnum=0 (dev_t=0x1c011000) is POWERFAILED
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: PV 0 has been returned to vg[2].
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: PV 0 has been returned to vg[2].
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: A link to PV 0 in vg[2] has been restored.
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: A link to PV 0 in vg[2] has been restored.
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: Performed a switch for Lun ID = 0 (pv = 0x0cf76400), from raw device 0x1c011000 (with priority: 1, and current flags: 0x280) to raw device 0x1c040000 (with priority: 0, and current flags: 0x80).
Oct 28 08:52:51 test_nts vmunix: LVM: Performed a switch for Lun ID = 0 (pv = 0x0cf76400), from raw device 0x1c011000 (with priority: 1, and current flags: 0x280) to raw device 0x1c040000 (with priority: 0, and current flags: 0x80).
----
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2003 08:57 PM
10-27-2003 08:57 PM
Solutionso everything is ok now, but the disk which powered down is possibly dying. Still, as your mirrored nothing to worry about for now.
I would try your lifls command again to see if causes the same problem, if so then I would log a hardware call with HP and get it replaced - before it dies completely.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2003 09:02 PM
10-27-2003 09:02 PM
Re: lifls
Yes, error messages written to syslog just exactly after i typed "lifls"
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2003 09:05 PM
10-27-2003 09:05 PM
Re: lifls
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2003 09:11 PM
10-27-2003 09:11 PM
Re: lifls
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
10-27-2003 09:56 PM
10-27-2003 09:56 PM
Re: lifls
which wasn't active that time (c0t4d0 was).
What LVM did is to make c1t1d0 active for a while (time that took to lifls complete) and jump back to c0t4d0.I can guess despite that lifls doesn't touch LVM (works on raw device) -
LVM acts as it does. I'd check both drives (basic check with dd), see no error or scsi messages were there. If no other error messages or failures are there - monitor the drive for a while and let it be.