Hi! 2008/10/6 Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com> > > On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 11:05:34AM +0200, Michael Schmarck wrote: > > $ sudo lvm lvcreate -s -l 25%LV -n Bilder_snap /dev/sys/Bilder > > Please express size as %VG, %PVS, or %FREE. > > Did I do something wrong, or is the output "--help" > > just wrong? > > %LV is for resizing an existing LV. All right; but why is it shown in the output of lvcreate --help in the "-s" section? It's not as if %<whatever> is shown in every output of "-l" (eg. in the normal/first section of lvcreate, in the "-l" list, no % options are shown). > lvcreate -s -l n%LV would indeed be unambiguous, Yep. > but what then about lvresize on a snapshot? Would it be % of > base LV or % of existing snapshot? Hm. What happens, if you do a "lvcreate -s -l 42%VGS" and then make the VG larger? Do you then make the snapshot volume larger as well? Or what, if you'd use 8%FREE and then change the free space - do you make the snap lv larger and smaller as required? Anyway: I'd expect the size of the snap lv to *NOT* change. Reason: The snap LV has been created with a certain size. Why should changes in the setup of the VG change the size of the snap lv? The size of a (snap) LV is something which I expect to be static (unless I, the admin of the system, change it). It should not at all be dynamic (although dynamic volumes are kinda cool, as can be seen in the case of ZFS - but that's a totally different approach and thus not comparable to LVM). > (Perhaps we need %ORIGIN.) Maybe. But that would IMO only make sense, if you currently change the sizes of snap LVs dynamically in the case of the other % options. If that's not done, then adding yet another option there would not be such a great idea, IMO. Instead, %LV should be used - for the reasons, please see above *g*. Best regards, Mike _______________________________________________ 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/
