On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 08:59:26PM +0200, jon+lvm@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > i sort of consider LVM part of the kernel too, because without each > other, neither is anything. No, LVM is not part of the kernel at all. I use device mapper without LVM, and EVMS uses device-mapper. > i have other kernel coding ideas if you're interested, some are more > hardcore than others. They are not LVM related though, except that > one of them might be a dm-target, or a filesystem. That one is because > i'm a little annoyed that it is cumbersome to add more disks to a > system, and LVM is not the answer i'm looking for. What i want is: > i have a number of disks, and i want to distribuate data across those, > but the data must be replicated so i can handle a loss of one or more > disks (user specified). Further more, i want to be able to add new > disks to this blockdevice, and remove them. The filesystem grows > and shrinks. It is sort of a raid5 device that you can add new disks > into like you can with LVM, and then the system distribuates the data > across the disks. This might take some time to rearrange the data, > but the point is that the sysadm shouldnt worry about how to migrate > data, he/she justs adds disks. This just sounds like some management scripts that could be written on top of the existing volume managers and file system tools. - Joe