HPE GreenLake Administration
- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- vgimport query
Operating System - HP-UX
1833867
Members
2420
Online
110063
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
back
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
back
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
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Go to solution
Topic Options
- 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
01-12-2007 04:10 AM
01-12-2007 04:10 AM
Hi all,
We have just carried out a bcv split and re-mounted the bcv volumes onto an alternate server. This is all good and it has worked but I thought it would fail. This is because the mapfiles which we have used to import the data were taken when the bcv's were mounted on a completely different host with different pv paths. I thought I would have had to use the -f option when exporting and importing to specify correct pv paths however this was not required. Why is this how does it know which disks to use to import the volumes on the new host. Hope this makes sense its Friday and late.
We have just carried out a bcv split and re-mounted the bcv volumes onto an alternate server. This is all good and it has worked but I thought it would fail. This is because the mapfiles which we have used to import the data were taken when the bcv's were mounted on a completely different host with different pv paths. I thought I would have had to use the -f option when exporting and importing to specify correct pv paths however this was not required. Why is this how does it know which disks to use to import the volumes on the new host. Hope this makes sense its Friday and late.
Solved! Go to Solution.
2 REPLIES 2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-12-2007 04:21 AM
01-12-2007 04:21 AM
Solution
Hi Adam,
Did you happen to use the -s option?
The map files only contain the lvnames and are not even required if you used default (lvol1, lvol2, etc) names. The -s option scans the disks and reads the LVM information written in the lvm header files to determine what disks should belong in the VG.
Pete
Pete
Did you happen to use the -s option?
The map files only contain the lvnames and are not even required if you used default (lvol1, lvol2, etc) names. The -s option scans the disks and reads the LVM information written in the lvm header files to determine what disks should belong in the VG.
Pete
Pete
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-12-2007 04:51 AM
01-12-2007 04:51 AM
Re: vgimport query
I agree with you Adam, I would think it should have failed.
It would seem it worked by using the -s option, as Pete mentions, since obviously these devices could be shared between boxes....it didn't choke (this time). This is not a practice done here.
And I wouldn't trust that you will get the same results in every case. Using the -f tends to be the best and 'solid' way to ensure things come up as they should.
Just my 2cents,
Rgrds,
Rita
It would seem it worked by using the -s option, as Pete mentions, since obviously these devices could be shared between boxes....it didn't choke (this time). This is not a practice done here.
And I wouldn't trust that you will get the same results in every case. Using the -f
Just my 2cents,
Rgrds,
Rita
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
Company
Events and news
Customer resources
© Copyright 2025 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP