David Kewley wrote: > I'm looking at building several multi-TB arrays in an academic research > environment. So far I've been heading toward FC3 (or possibly RHEL4 when > it's released), EVMS, and XFS. > > I've seen little or no mention of EVMS in the Fedora and RHEL communities, > and > I'm wondering why that is. From reading websites & mailing list archives, > it seems to me like EVMS is more mature than LVM2, and more fully-featured > than > either LVM or LVM2. I've not actually used any of the three yet. > > Today I'm patching the FC3t2 kernel (541) with the patches (mostly DM > patches) recommended on the EVMS website > http://evms.sourceforge.net/install/, and > it's going quite smoothly. So far only the first patchfile in the udm1 > patchset didn't apply, because it's already applied in FC3t2 kernel 541. > A similar patching attempt yesterday on FC1 was miserable (I expect no one > will be surprised at that :). > > Is there a good reason to use LVM or LVM2 rather than EVMS? Is there a > reason EVMS isn't included in FC? > IIRC LVM was accepted by kernel developers over EVMS, which quietly accepted this decision.
