On Tue, 4 Apr 2017 14:23:52 +0200 François Patte <francois.patte(a)mi.parisdescartes.fr&gt; wrote: man lvmetad and it will explain how lvmetad works, and why these messages are being generated, and what they mean. My guess is that, if it runs, information will be lost from the system, or process sequence will be broken. The systemd message seems pretty clear in that regard; there are jobs running that are using /var. If it wasn't you that was trying to umount /var, then this seems like a system error, as the system shouldn't be trying to umount /var when jobs are running, except maybe at shutdown. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can explain it better.

On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 12:28:11 +0200 François Patte <francois.patte(a)mi.parisdescartes.fr&gt; wrote: I don't know the internals, but this is probably because lvmetad is disabled. When lvmetad is not used, LVM commands revert to scanning disks for LVM metadata. New LVM disks that appear on the system must be scanned before lvmetad knows about them. If lvmetad does not know about a disk, then LVM commands using lvmetad will also not know about it. When disks are added or removed from the system, lvmetad must be updated Something, somewhere has been told that lvmetad.service is enabled, and is trying to use it. Perhaps this is the source of the above errors? It is trying to use lvmetad even though it has been disabled? In my case, this delay (seemed to be 90 seconds) was caused by a daemon that didn't respond properly to the kill -15 command that systemd sends out to running processes at shutdown. If I kill that daemon with a kill -9 command before I shutdown, the shutdown occurs quickly. So, in that sense, systemd folks are right. But I suspect they changed the kill from -9 to -15 somewhere along the way, causing this issue. The -9 doesn't allow cleanup, while the -15 does allow a process to catch the signal and clean up before shutdown, which is probably why they did it, and won't be changing back. Are you running any non standard daemons on your system? Daemons that weren't packaged by Fedora?