Re: Snapshot behavior on classic LVM vs ThinLVM

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

 



Il 13-04-2017 16:33 Zdenek Kabelac ha scritto:

Hello

Just let's repeat.

Full thin-pool is NOT in any way comparable to full filesystem.

Full filesystem has ALWAYS room for its metadata - it's not pretending
it's bigger - it has 'finite' space and expect this space to just BE
there.

Now when you have thin-pool - it cause quite a lot of trouble across
number of layers.  There are solvable and being fixed.

But as the rule #1 still applies - do not run your thin-pool out of
space - it will not always heal easily without losing date - there is
not a simple straighforward way how to fix it (especially when user
cannot ADD any new space he promised to have)

So monitoring pool and taking action ahead in time is always superior
solution to any later  postmortem systems restores.


If I remember correctly, EXT4 with error=remount-ro should freeze the filesystem as soon as write errors are detected. Is this configuration safer than standard behavior? Do you know if XFS (RHEL *default* filesystem) supports something similar?

Thanks.

--
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.danti@assyoma.it - info@assyoma.it
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8

_______________________________________________
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