<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.0.6603.0"> <TITLE>mount r/w and r/o</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY>  I have an ext3 filesystem mounted r/w on 1 host and r/o on multiple hosts. Dangerous but cost effective. I recently implemented some protection through a fc switch that restricts some hosts to r/o access to the data luns. So if someone types mount -o rw or something, all is not lost. The issue occurs when it's mounted r/w on 1 host and another host attempts to mount it r/o. The mount command takes about a minute to complete, it successfully mounts, and several error messages are reported... Nov 3 12:52:26 lax kernel: EXT3-fs: INFO: recovery required on readonly filesystem. Nov 3 12:52:26 lax kernel: EXT3-fs: write access will be enabled during recovery. Nov 3 12:52:27 lax kernel: cfq: depth 4 reached, tagging now on ...reports this for about 260 different sectors (makes sense, fc switch is preventing write access)... Nov 3 12:52:27 lax kernel: SCSI error : <494 0 0 1> return code = 0x8000002 Nov 3 12:52:27 lax kernel: sdl: Current: sense key: Data Protect Nov 3 12:52:27 lax kernel: Additional sense: Logical unit software write protected Nov 3 12:52:27 lax kernel: end_request: I/O error, dev sdl, sector 496 Nov 3 12:52:27 lax kernel: Buffer I/O error on device sdl, logical block 62 Nov 3 12:52:27 lax kernel: lost page write due to I/O error on sdl then completes... Nov 3 12:52:44 laxl kernel: EXT3-fs: recovery complete. (how???) Nov 3 12:52:44 laxl kernel: EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. This also happens on other filesystems and other devices under the same circumstances. When the filesystem is umounted from the r/w host, it mounts w/ out error on r/o host. It's interesting to note that after that's done, you can remount the filesystem on the r/w host, and then mount it on the r/o w/ just a few errors and w/ in seconds. My questions are... Should I be concerned by this? Is there a way to automatically skip the recovery attempt, and if so, should I use it? Am I going about this all wrong, is there a better way to do this (other than GFS)? Thanks. - Jeff </BODY> </HTML>