From: pSeries AIX Geek (aixgeek@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Tue Nov 12 2002 - 11:46:42 EST
That's true. And even if the "wrong" copy of the
jfslog was used to sync the other one, it wouldn't
matter -- the only operation in the jfslog that would
result in a "lost" transaction would be the 'commit'
-- and then only if the transaction had really
completed, so no problem ... [overly simplistic, I
realize.]
--- Holger.VanKoll@SWISSCOM.COM wrote:
> after further reading I assume the following:
>
> when booting after a crash, lvm cannot determine
> with copy of a LP has the latest data. mwc is only
> used to determine which copies are out of sync and
> to synchronize the copies.
>
> when booting, the jfslog is read once and after that
> (when mounting the fs read/write) its empty. no need
> to synchronize copies.
>
> sounds reasonable to me... but can anyone confirm?
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Van Koll Holger, IT-DCS-SES-UN
> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 7:30 PM
> To: aix-l@Princeton.EDU
> Subject: mwc and jfslog
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I noticed that mwc is (by default) turned
> off for paging-spaces and jfslogs. I understand this
> concerning paging-space, but why shouldn´t I care
> about consistent mirrors of jfslogs ?
>
> This thread
>
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=98198083800007&r=1&w=2
>
<http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=98198083800007&r=1&w=2>
> also ends with this question...
>
> Regards,
>
> Holger
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Wed Apr 09 2008 - 22:16:19 EDT