On Mon, Mar 14 2011 at 3:13pm -0400, Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote: > On 03/14/2011 12:17 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 14 2011 at 12:47pm -0400, > >Ron Johnson<ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote: > > > >>Hi, > >> > >>Is there any concern with mixing 4KB-sector drives with 512-byte > >>sector drives in the same LV? > > > >Both LVM2 and Device Mapper have been updated to accommodate stacking > >such a mix of drives. > > > >See this for a bit more detail: > >http://people.redhat.com/msnitzer/docs/io-limits.txt > > > >Particularly, the "Stacking I/O Limits" section. > > > >The concern raised for partial (4k) writes to the 512b drive was > >discussed a bit more here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/22/295 > > > > Does this mean that util-linux v2.17.1 fdisk correctly handle AF > disks? (Note that I will *not* be booting off an AF device.) > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/util-linux/v2.17/v2.17.1-ReleaseNotes > > fdisk: > - cleanup alignment, default to 1MiB offset [Karel Zak] > - don't check alignment_offset against geometry [Karel Zak] > - fallback for topology values [Karel Zak] > - fix ALIGN_UP [Karel Zak] > - fix check_alignment() [Karel Zak] > - fix default first sector [Karel Zak] > - use "optimal I/O size" in warnings [Karel Zak] > - use 1MiB offset and grain always when possible [Karel Zak] > - use more elegant way to count and check alignment [Karel Zak] > - use optimal_io_size [Karel Zak] Given that changelog, yes. (cc'ing kzak for the authoritative answer ;) _______________________________________________ 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/
