On 03/25/2011 11:52 PM, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/25/2011 11:24 PM, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
[snip]
2) make sure important LVs do not span multiple PVs (except for LVM
mirroring) - you could be unhappy in the event of a system crash.
But isn't "volumes larger than physical devices" (one of) the raison
d'etre of LVM?
Yes, but a power failure can then mess up the ordering of write completions
distributed between 2 or more PVs, which could defeat the assumptions made
by your file system journaling.
File a bug... But against what? LVM? The FS? The block layer?
and
No, YMMV, but I generally have a number of smaller LVs (for virtual
machines)
and it is nice to have a larger pool of PVs from which they are allocated.
I guess I'm just a DP Dinosaur who thinks that if a machine is beefy
enough to run a bunch of services then those services should run
directly on the machine. (Obviously I don't work for a web hosting
company...)
--
"Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure
the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally
corrupt."
Samuel Adams, essay in The Public Advertiser, 1749
_______________________________________________
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/
