[OpenAFS] Moving root.*.readonly from /vicepa to /vicepb

Todd_DeSantis@transarc.com Todd_DeSantis@transarc.com
Wed, 29 May 2002 14:12:46 -0400 (EDT)

Hi -

I have been watching many of the discussions regarding this thread and
there are many things to consider.

There is a good time to use "vos remsite" and there are also times
when you should use "vos remove".

You can not have 2 ReadOnlys on the same fileserver machine.  The "vos
addsite" command checks the VLDB abd will prevent this.

And what most everyone is missing, the actual release will look like
it is successful, but the second volume will NOT come ONLINE.  The
fileserver/volserver know the volume ID of the ReadOnly and will not
allow the same ID to be online more than once.

Here is an example of 

[PMR-88971] vos listvol server | grep atd
atd                536871132 RW       7406 K On-line
atd.readonly       536871133 RO       7406 K On-line
atd.readonly       536871133 RO       7406 K Off-line

See that the second RO is offline.  The 3 volumes are on 3 seperate
vice partitions on this server.

However, if the original RO is on the same partition as the RW, the 

will work because the original ReadOnly will be removed because the
volserver will think it is a temporary clone used in the release.

And clients might also not even care about things because they already
have things cached.

The clients can fail if they need to get to the RO and the client's
known location of this data does not exist any more.  SOmetimes the
client can figure things out and go back to the VLDB abd see the
location changed and access that RO seamlessly to the user.  Other
times, it can just fail and the user would need to do an "fs
checkvolume" command to force the client to go back to the VLDB for
location info.

So depending on how the the original poster of this thread has things
setup, the 
might not work.

But we do know that the 
will work.

Sorry for using abbreviations for the vos commands, I hope it isn't
too confusing.  As you can see, there are many ways that this could
work and fail.

At least this is my take on it


AFS Support