On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 12:42:27PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > Could I just echo Lars' statement. With the upstream inclusion of drbd, > dm-replicator becomes a *third* replication system asking to be in > kernel. It is definitely a kernel policy question of whether we want > three separate replicators, and so should be Cc'd to lkml so that people > interested in that can weigh in. And unliley the previous two this one actually offers the benefit of beeing integrated with our major block device management framework. Interesting that the question comes up now after I was shot down for it in the drbd discussion. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
