Agree. But, at least in my case, I've been studying better alternatives (this means testing) but I've been required to grow the file system because of our needs. So, It's not the best solution, but until I can move to a better one (this probably means buy more hardware) this is my best option to provide space. JFS, XFS and other file systems seems ok, but it wouldn't be a better solution something like Lustre, Ceph or GlusterFS? They seems to provide better scalability been also POSIX-compliant. What do you think? Any inputs will be welcome :) regards, Jordi Joseph L. Casale wrote: >> It took less then 90 minutes. >> >> Ehud. > > 90 Minutes, how "enterprisable" is that? Just cause you can, doesn't mean you should: What if that server tanked during working hours at the corp? You would have to sit and wait for it to come back up. Worse than that are the rebuild times for degraded arrays. Try to rebuild a **huge** array on **huge** discs during production with lots of IO and hope you don't lose another disc. There are practical alternatives with thoughtful management to circumvent the need for and 8EB or larger array, but YMMV :) > > jlc > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > > _______________________________________________ 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/
