LVM autoextend not working, what am I doing wrong ?

[tigerblue77]

Hello !
I am running tests using VDO pools and LVM thin pools. I've added this to lvm.conf :

snapshot_autoextend_threshold = 90
snapshot_autoextend_percent = 10
thin_pool_autoextend_threshold = 90
thin_pool_autoextend_percent = 10
vdo_pool_autoextend_threshold = 90
vdo_pool_autoextend_percent = 10

then ran :

systemctl restart lvm2-monitor

Following this RHEL documentation : https://docs.redhat.com/en/document...y-extending-a-thin-pool_extending-a-thin-pool
And my

lvs -o +seg_monitor

shows they are monitored :

  LV              VG   Attr       LSize   Pool           Origin Data%  Meta%  Move Log Cpy%Sync Convert Monitor
  VG-1_LV-THIN-1  VG-1 twi-aotz--  10.00g                       7.27   11.91                            monitored
  base-501-disk-0 VG-1 Vri---tz-k   8.00g VG-1_LV-THIN-1
  test            VG-1 vwi-aov--- 100.00g vpool0
  vpool0          VG-1 dwi-------  30.00g                                                               monitored
  VG-2_LV-THIN-1  VG-2 twi-a-tz--  10.00g                       0.00   10.94                            monitored
  data            pve  twi-a-tz-- <59.81g                       0.00   1.59                             monitored
  root            pve  -wi-ao---- <41.52g

But I fill my VDO or thin LVs and they don't get expanded...

 

[waltar]

Btw. vdo is horrible to performance and so it's just useable for data which isn't accessed anymore ...

 

[tigerblue77]

My bad, everything works. The problem was my misunderstanding what I was seeing.
@waltar It's not that horrible with some tweaks but I do agree that performances needs improvements.

 

[waltar]

As I tested with rh8 always get cpu limit defined so much threads for all the different vdo parts even oversubscribing but so that host always had free cpu time, get bigger buffers anywhere and when doing filesystem benchmark it was don't know about 20x times slower than without vdo. I then decided it's just much more cost efficient to get more disks for space instead of the need of highest cpu count and freq and with lots of ram too. Vdo is just a theoretically solution while when any kind of performance level should be reached you even burn lots of cpu power which even is with lots of more disks more effiecent to reach, so practically it's trash software in my opinion.