Ray Morris [support@bettercgi.com] wrote: > I don't know about a whitepaper, but I can address > your example. > > > he makes one volume group for each logical volume (more or less) > > If each one has one volume, that's not exactly a volume > GROUP, is it? If groups and volumes are basically synomous, > he gives up all the benfits of groups. In fact, he gives > up most of the benefits of logical volumes, since each PV > has to be in one group, and each VG is one LV, you're left > with one LV per PV - might as well just use partitions > directly. I agree, you lose some flexibility but it has some advantage compared to plain partitions without LVM. E.g. he can make a file system larger than any disk with multiple disks in the above LVM (one LV per VG) configuration. There are other advantages. I am not sure the reason for making only one LV per VG though! Thanks, Malahal. _______________________________________________ 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/
