Mount point fails to reinstate after reboot of Virtual Machine
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I have created a virtual machine with mount point of directory stored locally. It is mounted on /dev/sdb as shown below.
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 100G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part /boot
├─sda2 8:2 0 1K 0 part
└─sda5 8:5 0 99.5G 0 part
├─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-root 252:0 0 95.5G 0 lvm /
└─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-swap_1 252:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP]
sdb 8:16 0 200G 0 disk /var/details
sdc 8:32 0 200G 0 disk
I have also added the details for the same in /etc/fstab.
/dev/sdb /var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
But after i do the reboot of this virtual machine, mount points are lost and i get below output in lsblk.
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 100G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part /boot
├─sda2 8:2 0 1K 0 part
└─sda5 8:5 0 99.5G 0 part
├─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-root 252:0 0 95.5G 0 lvm /
└─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-swap_1 252:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP]
sdb 8:16 0 200G 0 disk
└─QEMU_HARDDISK_QM00002 252:2 0 200G 0 mpath
sdc 8:32 0 200G 0 disk
└─QEMU_HARDDISK_QM00003 252:3 0 200G 0 mpath
This VM is created on a KVM box. I am not sure if this is a generic bug or problem in my setup.
linux mount virtualbox virtual-machine kvm
asked Oct 9 '17 at 13:13
CbK
11
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I have created a virtual machine with mount point of directory stored locally. It is mounted on /dev/sdb as shown below.
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 100G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part /boot
├─sda2 8:2 0 1K 0 part
└─sda5 8:5 0 99.5G 0 part
├─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-root 252:0 0 95.5G 0 lvm /
└─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-swap_1 252:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP]
sdb 8:16 0 200G 0 disk /var/details
sdc 8:32 0 200G 0 disk
I have also added the details for the same in /etc/fstab.
/dev/sdb /var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
But after i do the reboot of this virtual machine, mount points are lost and i get below output in lsblk.
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 100G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part /boot
├─sda2 8:2 0 1K 0 part
└─sda5 8:5 0 99.5G 0 part
├─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-root 252:0 0 95.5G 0 lvm /
└─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-swap_1 252:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP]
sdb 8:16 0 200G 0 disk
└─QEMU_HARDDISK_QM00002 252:2 0 200G 0 mpath
sdc 8:32 0 200G 0 disk
└─QEMU_HARDDISK_QM00003 252:3 0 200G 0 mpath
This VM is created on a KVM box. I am not sure if this is a generic bug or problem in my setup.
linux mount virtualbox virtual-machine kvm
asked Oct 9 '17 at 13:13
CbK
11
What happens when you run mount -a after the reboot? Do all the entries in /etc/fstab mount?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:18
it says root:~# mount -a mount: /dev/sdb is already mounted or /var/details busy
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:21
Check the output of dmesg to see if anything is reported.
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:23
i got only this error in whole output of dmesg. [ 6.616492] device-mapper: table: 252:2: multipath: error getting device. And there was no reference of /var/details or /dev/sdb
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:31
Why are you using _netdev when the device isn't a network device and therefore doesn't need to wait for the network device to come up?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:33
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I have created a virtual machine with mount point of directory stored locally. It is mounted on /dev/sdb as shown below.
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 100G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part /boot
├─sda2 8:2 0 1K 0 part
└─sda5 8:5 0 99.5G 0 part
├─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-root 252:0 0 95.5G 0 lvm /
└─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-swap_1 252:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP]
sdb 8:16 0 200G 0 disk /var/details
sdc 8:32 0 200G 0 disk
I have also added the details for the same in /etc/fstab.
/dev/sdb /var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
But after i do the reboot of this virtual machine, mount points are lost and i get below output in lsblk.
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 100G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part /boot
├─sda2 8:2 0 1K 0 part
└─sda5 8:5 0 99.5G 0 part
├─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-root 252:0 0 95.5G 0 lvm /
└─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-swap_1 252:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP]
sdb 8:16 0 200G 0 disk
└─QEMU_HARDDISK_QM00002 252:2 0 200G 0 mpath
sdc 8:32 0 200G 0 disk
└─QEMU_HARDDISK_QM00003 252:3 0 200G 0 mpath
This VM is created on a KVM box. I am not sure if this is a generic bug or problem in my setup.
linux mount virtualbox virtual-machine kvm
asked Oct 9 '17 at 13:13
CbK
11
I have created a virtual machine with mount point of directory stored locally. It is mounted on /dev/sdb as shown below.
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 100G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part /boot
├─sda2 8:2 0 1K 0 part
└─sda5 8:5 0 99.5G 0 part
├─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-root 252:0 0 95.5G 0 lvm /
└─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-swap_1 252:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP]
sdb 8:16 0 200G 0 disk /var/details
sdc 8:32 0 200G 0 disk
I have also added the details for the same in /etc/fstab.
/dev/sdb /var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
But after i do the reboot of this virtual machine, mount points are lost and i get below output in lsblk.
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 100G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part /boot
├─sda2 8:2 0 1K 0 part
└─sda5 8:5 0 99.5G 0 part
├─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-root 252:0 0 95.5G 0 lvm /
└─r730bld--04--vm22--vg-swap_1 252:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP]
sdb 8:16 0 200G 0 disk
└─QEMU_HARDDISK_QM00002 252:2 0 200G 0 mpath
sdc 8:32 0 200G 0 disk
└─QEMU_HARDDISK_QM00003 252:3 0 200G 0 mpath
This VM is created on a KVM box. I am not sure if this is a generic bug or problem in my setup.
linux mount virtualbox virtual-machine kvm
linux mount virtualbox virtual-machine kvm
asked Oct 9 '17 at 13:13
CbK
11
asked Oct 9 '17 at 13:13
CbK
11
asked Oct 9 '17 at 13:13
CbK
11
asked Oct 9 '17 at 13:13
CbK
11
asked Oct 9 '17 at 13:13
CbK
11
11
What happens when you run mount -a after the reboot? Do all the entries in /etc/fstab mount?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:18
it says root:~# mount -a mount: /dev/sdb is already mounted or /var/details busy
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:21
Check the output of dmesg to see if anything is reported.
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:23
i got only this error in whole output of dmesg. [ 6.616492] device-mapper: table: 252:2: multipath: error getting device. And there was no reference of /var/details or /dev/sdb
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:31
Why are you using _netdev when the device isn't a network device and therefore doesn't need to wait for the network device to come up?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:33
 |Â
show 1 more comment
What happens when you run mount -a after the reboot? Do all the entries in /etc/fstab mount?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:18
it says root:~# mount -a mount: /dev/sdb is already mounted or /var/details busy
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:21
Check the output of dmesg to see if anything is reported.
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:23
i got only this error in whole output of dmesg. [ 6.616492] device-mapper: table: 252:2: multipath: error getting device. And there was no reference of /var/details or /dev/sdb
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:31
Why are you using _netdev when the device isn't a network device and therefore doesn't need to wait for the network device to come up?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:33
What happens when you run mount -a after the reboot? Do all the entries in /etc/fstab mount?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:18
What happens when you run mount -a after the reboot? Do all the entries in /etc/fstab mount?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:18
it says root:~# mount -a mount: /dev/sdb is already mounted or /var/details busy
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:21
it says root:~# mount -a mount: /dev/sdb is already mounted or /var/details busy
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:21
Check the output of dmesg to see if anything is reported.
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:23
Check the output of dmesg to see if anything is reported.
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:23
i got only this error in whole output of dmesg. [ 6.616492] device-mapper: table: 252:2: multipath: error getting device. And there was no reference of /var/details or /dev/sdb
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:31
i got only this error in whole output of dmesg. [ 6.616492] device-mapper: table: 252:2: multipath: error getting device. And there was no reference of /var/details or /dev/sdb
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:31
Why are you using _netdev when the device isn't a network device and therefore doesn't need to wait for the network device to come up?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:33
Why are you using _netdev when the device isn't a network device and therefore doesn't need to wait for the network device to come up?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:33
 |Â
show 1 more comment
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Grrr.... yes, there two possible issues to content with, the first being systemd on recent machines, and there I'm sorry to say I have no intention to wonder about that one this week, however, let's look at the second issue:
The recent advice is to make use of the most appropriate /dev/disk/by-id, as the order of the devices (especially with friend(?) systemd) might change around. Okay, I have a historical preference to the Solaris and old devfsd naming conventions, but the disk/by- does work.
Adding to that, I'd also advice you to reconsider using a partition, just to have it better recognized than the raw disk as a filesystem. Perhaps even (during the mkfs or a tunefs afterwards) label the partition, that way systemd might behave also a tad better.
answered Oct 9 '17 at 13:35
Hvisage
1719
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
I have resolved the issue by modifying /etc/fstab using UUID of the disk instead of the name.
UUID="1a1cbf5d-b358-48fe-adf4-aa748b55e6c4" var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
answered Oct 10 '17 at 7:13
CbK
11
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Grrr.... yes, there two possible issues to content with, the first being systemd on recent machines, and there I'm sorry to say I have no intention to wonder about that one this week, however, let's look at the second issue:
The recent advice is to make use of the most appropriate /dev/disk/by-id, as the order of the devices (especially with friend(?) systemd) might change around. Okay, I have a historical preference to the Solaris and old devfsd naming conventions, but the disk/by- does work.
Adding to that, I'd also advice you to reconsider using a partition, just to have it better recognized than the raw disk as a filesystem. Perhaps even (during the mkfs or a tunefs afterwards) label the partition, that way systemd might behave also a tad better.
answered Oct 9 '17 at 13:35
Hvisage
1719
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Grrr.... yes, there two possible issues to content with, the first being systemd on recent machines, and there I'm sorry to say I have no intention to wonder about that one this week, however, let's look at the second issue:
The recent advice is to make use of the most appropriate /dev/disk/by-id, as the order of the devices (especially with friend(?) systemd) might change around. Okay, I have a historical preference to the Solaris and old devfsd naming conventions, but the disk/by- does work.
Adding to that, I'd also advice you to reconsider using a partition, just to have it better recognized than the raw disk as a filesystem. Perhaps even (during the mkfs or a tunefs afterwards) label the partition, that way systemd might behave also a tad better.
answered Oct 9 '17 at 13:35
Hvisage
1719
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Grrr.... yes, there two possible issues to content with, the first being systemd on recent machines, and there I'm sorry to say I have no intention to wonder about that one this week, however, let's look at the second issue:
The recent advice is to make use of the most appropriate /dev/disk/by-id, as the order of the devices (especially with friend(?) systemd) might change around. Okay, I have a historical preference to the Solaris and old devfsd naming conventions, but the disk/by- does work.
Adding to that, I'd also advice you to reconsider using a partition, just to have it better recognized than the raw disk as a filesystem. Perhaps even (during the mkfs or a tunefs afterwards) label the partition, that way systemd might behave also a tad better.
answered Oct 9 '17 at 13:35
Hvisage
1719
Grrr.... yes, there two possible issues to content with, the first being systemd on recent machines, and there I'm sorry to say I have no intention to wonder about that one this week, however, let's look at the second issue:
The recent advice is to make use of the most appropriate /dev/disk/by-id, as the order of the devices (especially with friend(?) systemd) might change around. Okay, I have a historical preference to the Solaris and old devfsd naming conventions, but the disk/by- does work.
Adding to that, I'd also advice you to reconsider using a partition, just to have it better recognized than the raw disk as a filesystem. Perhaps even (during the mkfs or a tunefs afterwards) label the partition, that way systemd might behave also a tad better.
answered Oct 9 '17 at 13:35
Hvisage
1719
answered Oct 9 '17 at 13:35
Hvisage
1719
answered Oct 9 '17 at 13:35
Hvisage
1719
answered Oct 9 '17 at 13:35
Hvisage
1719
1719
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
I have resolved the issue by modifying /etc/fstab using UUID of the disk instead of the name.
UUID="1a1cbf5d-b358-48fe-adf4-aa748b55e6c4" var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
answered Oct 10 '17 at 7:13
CbK
11
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
I have resolved the issue by modifying /etc/fstab using UUID of the disk instead of the name.
UUID="1a1cbf5d-b358-48fe-adf4-aa748b55e6c4" var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
answered Oct 10 '17 at 7:13
CbK
11
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
I have resolved the issue by modifying /etc/fstab using UUID of the disk instead of the name.
UUID="1a1cbf5d-b358-48fe-adf4-aa748b55e6c4" var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
answered Oct 10 '17 at 7:13
CbK
11
I have resolved the issue by modifying /etc/fstab using UUID of the disk instead of the name.
UUID="1a1cbf5d-b358-48fe-adf4-aa748b55e6c4" var/details xfs rw,user,auto,_netdev 0 0
answered Oct 10 '17 at 7:13
CbK
11
answered Oct 10 '17 at 7:13
CbK
11
answered Oct 10 '17 at 7:13
CbK
11
answered Oct 10 '17 at 7:13
CbK
11
11
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f397020%2fmount-point-fails-to-reinstate-after-reboot-of-virtual-machine%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
What happens when you run mount -a after the reboot? Do all the entries in /etc/fstab mount?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:18
it says root:~# mount -a mount: /dev/sdb is already mounted or /var/details busy
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:21
Check the output of dmesg to see if anything is reported.
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:23
i got only this error in whole output of dmesg. [ 6.616492] device-mapper: table: 252:2: multipath: error getting device. And there was no reference of /var/details or /dev/sdb
– CbK
Oct 9 '17 at 13:31
Why are you using _netdev when the device isn't a network device and therefore doesn't need to wait for the network device to come up?
– Raman Sailopal
Oct 9 '17 at 13:33