On Sep 20, 2006, at 6:22 AM, Tobias Bluhm wrote:
Scott Lamb wrote on 09/19/2006 06:40:43 PM:
This is my biggest beef with LVM - why doesn't *any* of the
documentation point this out? There are very few good reasons to use
LVM without RAID, and "ignorance" certainly isn't among them. I don't
see any mention of RAID or disk failures in the manual pages or in
the HOWTO.
Good point. So if the docs make no mention of RAID or fail-over or
redundency or spares, what made you assume that
LVM had such capabilities????
If that "you" is second-person singular, I didn't. I probed deep
enough to discover that it did not do RAID, but there were enough
suggestions that it could do redundancy that it took me a while to
come to that conclusion:
(1) the many-disk examples, which would be a horrible idea otherwise
(2) the striping tuning options
(3) some vague mention of mirroring...Heinz has mentioned it in this
thread, but I don't see any actual information about how it's done.
(4) ...probably more I'm forgetting...
So I don't know why you are surprised that people are assuming this
and ending up without raid. (Did you see Mark Krenz's email? Three
people this week, one of whom actually lost data because of it.)
All is fixable. Fabien's suggested changes are a great improvement.
--
Scott Lamb <http://www.slamb.org/>
_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
