Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m9NJV8jv001114 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:31:08 -0400 Received: from qmail-admn-norm-0.netfirms.com (q0-admin-norm.netfirms.com [38.113.184.28]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id m9NJV3dY022339 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:31:05 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 15:31:42 -0400 Message-ID: <20081023193142.GA17753@netfirms.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline From: Steve Shorter Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM corruption possibilites?? Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-lvm@redhat.com Howdy! I intend a simple minimal setup of LVM. I have a number of hardware nodes connected to a SAN. On the SAN is a pool of drives. If I assign whole drives to Volume Groups and dedicate each Volume Group to a single node, am I correct in assuming that data/metadata corruption will/can not occur? Each node will only modify the VG that it is assigned. Are there any other issues that need to be considered? Am I correct in assuming that Volume/LVM metadata for a volume is written only to disks in that volume and volumes are independent of each other and that in this simple setup some kind of clustering solution is not neccessary? thanx - steve