lvcreate: support --force option
PATCH 1/1 lvcreate: support --force option
The option is supported in the logic of lvcreate but is omitted in commands.h.
--- WHATS_NEW | 1 + tools/commands.h | 4 +++- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
WHATS_NEW +1 -0
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ Version 2.02.133 - ====================================== + Make lvcreate support --force option Cleanup vgimportclone script and remove dependency on awk, grep, cut and tr. Add vg_missing_pv_count report field to report number of missing PVs in a VG. Properly identify internal LV holding sanlock locks within lv_role field.
tools/commands.h +3 -1
@@ -311,6 +311,7 @@ xx(lvcreate,"\t[-C|--contiguous {y|n}]\n" "\t[--commandprofile ProfileName]\n" "\t[-d|--debug]\n" +"\t[-f|--force]\n" "\t[-h|-?|--help]\n" "\t[--errorwhenfull {y|n}]\n" "\t[--ignoremonitoring]\n"
@@ -360,6 +361,7 @@ xx(lvcreate,"\t[--commandprofile ProfileName]\n" "\t[-d|--debug]\n" "\t[--discards {ignore|nopassdown|passdown}]\n" +"\t[-f|--force]\n" "\t[-h|-?|--help]\n" "\t[--ignoremonitoring]\n" "\t[--monitor {y|n}]\n"
@@ -386,7 +388,7 @@ xx(lvcreate, addtag_ARG, alloc_ARG, autobackup_ARG, activate_ARG, available_ARG, cache_ARG, cachemode_ARG, cachepool_ARG, cachepolicy_ARG, cachesettings_ARG, chunksize_ARG, contiguous_ARG, corelog_ARG, discards_ARG, errorwhenfull_ARG, - extents_ARG, ignoreactivationskip_ARG, ignoremonitoring_ARG, major_ARG, + extents_ARG, force_ARG, ignoreactivationskip_ARG, ignoremonitoring_ARG, major_ARG, metadataprofile_ARG, minor_ARG, mirrorlog_ARG, mirrors_ARG, monitor_ARG, minrecoveryrate_ARG, maxrecoveryrate_ARG, name_ARG, nosync_ARG, noudevsync_ARG, permission_ARG, persistent_ARG,
Signature · 1 line
1.8.1.4
PATCH 1/1 lvcreate: support --force option
Dne 10.10.2015 v 12:39 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 3 lines
The option is supported in the logic of lvcreate but is omitted in
commands.h.
Nope - it's not intended to be unsupported so far.
We do support --yes to overcome prompts.
Normally --force is meant to be used on paths to proceed with i.e. lvremove, lvconvert
Do you have any case in mind where '--force' with lvcreate would have make any sense ?
IMHO creating something with --force looks to me like crazy idea to start with
- but maybe there is some use-case I'm missing ?
Zdenek
PATCH 1/1 lvcreate: support --force option
Hi Zdenek,
Thanks for your reply.
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/10/2015 at 09:17 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 7 lines · Kabelac
Dne 10.10.2015 v 12:39 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 3 lines
The option is supported in the logic of lvcreate but is omitted in
commands.h.Nope - it's not intended to be unsupported so far.
Quoted 8 lines
We do support --yes to overcome prompts.
Normally --force is meant to be used on paths to proceed with i.e. lvremove, lvconvert
Do you have any case in mind where '--force' with lvcreate would have make any
sense ?
Not really. I met this problem when I was using lvcreate with the --wipesignature option. --yes works for me. But I also found that --force should also work when I read the source. However, it reports -f/--force is an invalid option for lvcreate.
Quoted 4 lines
IMHO creating something with --force looks to me like crazy idea to start with
- but maybe there is some use-case I'm missing ?
Currently there is no introduction to --yes in the manpage of lvcreate. How about adding it to the manpage?
Regards,
Lidong
Quoted 8 lines
Zdenek
Signature · 3 lines
lvm-devel mailing list lvm-devel at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/lvm-devel
PATCH 1/1 lvcreate: support --force option
Dne 12.10.2015 v 04:26 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 18 lines
Hi Zdenek,
Thanks for your reply.
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/10/2015 at 09:17 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 12 lines · Kabelac
Dne 10.10.2015 v 12:39 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 3 lines
The option is supported in the logic of lvcreate but is omitted in
commands.h.Nope - it's not intended to be unsupported so far.
We do support --yes to overcome prompts.
Normally --force is meant to be used on paths to proceed with i.e. lvremove, lvconvert
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Do you have any case in mind where '--force' with lvcreate would have make any
sense ?
Not really. I met this problem when I was using lvcreate with the --wipesignature option. --yes works for me. But I also found that --force should also work when I read the source. However, it reports -f/--force is an invalid option for lvcreate.
Yep - and so far it should stay that way - --force has special meaning for being quite unsafe operation.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
IMHO creating something with --force looks to me like crazy idea to start with
- but maybe there is some use-case I'm missing ?
Currently there is no introduction to --yes in the manpage of lvcreate. How about adding it to the manpage?
Every lvm man page references 'man lvm' as the source of description for all 'commonly' accepted options (like --yes).
One day we may switch to 'generated' man pages - where very man page would have all options described - but I guess this 'day' is still pretty far away ;)
Regards
Zdenek
PATCH 1/1 lvcreate: support --force option
Hi Zdenek,
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/12/2015 at 05:02 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 19 lines · Kabelac
Dne 12.10.2015 v 04:26 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 18 lines
Hi Zdenek,
Thanks for your reply.
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/10/2015 at 09:17 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 12 lines · Kabelac
Dne 10.10.2015 v 12:39 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 3 lines
The option is supported in the logic of lvcreate but is omitted in
commands.h.Nope - it's not intended to be unsupported so far.
We do support --yes to overcome prompts.
Normally --force is meant to be used on paths to proceed with i.e. lvremove, lvconvert
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Do you have any case in mind where '--force' with lvcreate would have make
any
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
sense ?
Not really. I met this problem when I was using lvcreate with the
--wipesignature option.
If we set the --wipesignature to y while creating an lv, there will be a prompt for confirming in current code. Doesn't it make more sense that there shouldn't be the prompt? since we definitely want to remove the signature by setting this option.
Some options such as "--zero=y" don't give prompt, why it is different?
Please give your opinion.
Regards,
Lidong
Quoted 37 lines
Quoted 1 line
--yes works for me. But I also found that --force should also work when I read
the source.
Quoted 1 line
However, it reports -f/--force is an invalid option for lvcreate.
Yep - and so far it should stay that way - --force has special meaning for being quite unsafe operation.
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
IMHO creating something with --force looks to me like crazy idea to start
with
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
- but maybe there is some use-case I'm missing ?
Currently there is no introduction to --yes in the manpage of lvcreate. How
about adding it to
Quoted 1 line
the manpage?
Every lvm man page references 'man lvm' as the source of description for all
'commonly' accepted options (like --yes).
One day we may switch to 'generated' man pages - where very man page would have all options described - but I guess this 'day' is still pretty far away ;)
Regards
Zdenek
Signature · 3 lines
lvm-devel mailing list lvm-devel at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/lvm-devel
PATCH 1/1 lvcreate: support --force option
Dne 26.10.2015 v 11:07 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 28 lines
Hi Zdenek,
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/12/2015 at 05:02 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 24 lines · Kabelac
Dne 12.10.2015 v 04:26 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 19 lines
Hi Zdenek,
Thanks for your reply.
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/10/2015 at 09:17 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 13 lines · Kabelac
Dne 10.10.2015 v 12:39 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 3 lines
The option is supported in the logic of lvcreate but is omitted in
commands.h.Nope - it's not intended to be unsupported so far.
We do support --yes to overcome prompts.
Normally --force is meant to be used on paths to proceed with i.e. lvremove, lvconvert
Do you have any case in mind where '--force' with lvcreate would have make
any
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
sense ?
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 1 line
Not really. I met this problem when I was using lvcreate with the
--wipesignature option.
If we set the --wipesignature to y while creating an lv, there will be a prompt for confirming in current code. Doesn't it make more sense that there shouldn't be the prompt? since we definitely want to remove the signature by setting this option.
Some options such as "--zero=y" don't give prompt, why it is different?
Please give your opinion.
Hi
Here is explanation.
'zero' is unconditional and does not detect any signature - so it has nothing to prompt about - it zeroes first 4K as that's what user asked for.
New 'wipesignature' first detects signature and asks if you want to wipe. That's the API (and it's very similar to e.g. mkfs)
If lvm2 knows its overwriting something it prompts - that's the rule.
If you are going to take a 'risk' for no prompting - use '--yes'
lvm2 is possibly missing couple prompts - so you could possibly open BZ for the case we convert/overwrite something without prompting first.
But existing prompts will remain as they are as they are correct.
Regards
Zdenek
PATCH 1/1 lvcreate: support --force option
Hello Zdenek,
Thanks for your detailed explanation. I am clear that it's a rule that it prompt every time when lvm2 overwrites something.
Once there is a exception in future, I surely will notify the upstream. Thanks again.
Regards,
Lidong
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/26/2015 at 09:42 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 69 lines · Kabelac
Dne 26.10.2015 v 11:07 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 24 lines
Hi Zdenek,
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/12/2015 at 05:02 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 20 lines · Kabelac
Dne 12.10.2015 v 04:26 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 19 lines
Hi Zdenek,
Thanks for your reply.
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
On 10/10/2015 at 09:17 PM, in message <[email protected]>, Zdenek
Quoted 13 lines · Kabelac
Dne 10.10.2015 v 12:39 Lidong Zhong napsal(a):
Quoted 3 lines
The option is supported in the logic of lvcreate but is omitted in
commands.h.Nope - it's not intended to be unsupported so far.
We do support --yes to overcome prompts.
Normally --force is meant to be used on paths to proceed with i.e. lvremove, lvconvert
Do you have any case in mind where '--force' with lvcreate would have make
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
any
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
sense ?
Not really. I met this problem when I was using lvcreate with the
--wipesignature option.
If we set the --wipesignature to y while creating an lv, there will be a
prompt for confirming
Quoted 1 line
in current code. Doesn't it make more sense that there shouldn't be the
prompt? since we
Quoted 4 lines
definitely want to remove the signature by setting this option. Some options such as "--zero=y" don't give prompt, why it is different? Please give your opinion.
Hi
Here is explanation.
'zero' is unconditional and does not detect any signature - so it has nothing
to prompt about - it zeroes first 4K as that's what user asked for.
New 'wipesignature' first detects signature and asks if you want to wipe. That's the API (and it's very similar to e.g. mkfs)
If lvm2 knows its overwriting something it prompts - that's the rule.
If you are going to take a 'risk' for no prompting - use '--yes'
lvm2 is possibly missing couple prompts - so you could possibly open BZ for the case we convert/overwrite something without prompting first.
But existing prompts will remain as they are as they are correct.
Regards
Zdenek