Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-25,: Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability

# Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability

Stephen C. Tweedie (sct@dcs.ed.ac.uk)
Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:47:39 +0100

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability"
- Previous message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability"
- In reply to: Shawn Leas: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability"
- Reply: Shawn Leas: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability"

Hi,

On Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:47:25 -0500 (CDT), Shawn Leas
<sleas@ixion.honeywell.com> said:

> On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:

>> Miguel's prototype LVM stuff works by letting you mke2fs a new
>> partition and then daisy-chain that new device on to the end of the
>> existing filesystem, at run time, while it is all mounted. ... Is
>> there really any overwhelming justification for needing extra
>> device-level support for this functionality?

> Acutally, yes. His implementation provides us not with a vanilla
> block device, but with a logical volume that is extent based, and one
> that has definable properties beyond the capability of any normal
> block device. With this implementation, you are not limited by BIOS
> partitions...

I really don't follow you. You say, yes, there is need for more,
block-device-level support for this functionality. Then you go on to
say that the existing implementation which has NO block-device support
requirements has all sorts of extra advantage.

I don't understand! Are you in favour of doing it this way, in the
filesystem, using multiple filesystem extents (like I am), or in favour
of hiding all of that detail in a block device LVM system?

--Stephen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

- Next message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability"
- Previous message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability"
- In reply to: Shawn Leas: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability"
- Reply: Shawn Leas: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: LVM / Filesystems / High availability"