Re: is it right to specify '-l' with all the free PE in VG when creating a thin pool?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 03/09/2017 07:46 PM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
[snip]

while it works when specifying '-l' this way:

# lvcreate -l 100%FREE --thinpool thinpool0 vgtest
  Logical volume "thinpool0" created.

Is this something by design? or something may be wrong?
I can replicate this on both:

Hi

Yes this is by DESIGN

When you specify '-l|-L'  you specify size of 'dataLV'  (logical size)
But then you need some more space for 'metadata' LVs (_tmeta & _pmspare)

-l100%FREE figure this automagically and reduces size a bit to fit in metadata LV.


Some 'future' version of lvm2 may support something like '--physicalsize' which will be 'a total size used for every allocation made by command).
Hi Zdenek,

Thanks a lot for your clarification!

Looks some changes to thin-pool feature make it behave differently since a certain version.
It worked on lvm2-2.02.98 (sles12) by specifying '-l' with all the free PE. Anyway, '-l 100%FREE'
looks more reasonable in such case:)

Regards,
Eric


Regards

Zdenek

_______________________________________________
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/



[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Users]     [Kernel Development]     [Linux Clusters]     [Device Mapper]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]

  Powered by Linux