Doug Ledford wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 16:39 -0400, John Stoffel wrote:
>
>> I don't agree completely. I think the superblock location is a key
>> issue, because if you have a superblock location which moves depending
>> the filesystem or LVM you use to look at the partition (or full disk)
>> then you need to be even more careful about how to poke at things.
>
> This is the heart of the matter. When you consider that each file
> system and each volume management stack has a superblock, and they some
> store their superblocks at the end of devices and some at the beginning,
> and they can be stacked, then it becomes next to impossible to make sure
> a stacked setup is never recognized incorrectly under any circumstance.
I wonder if we should not really be talking about superblock versions 1.0, 1.1,
1.2 etc but a data format (0.9 vs 1.0) and a location (end,start,offset4k)?
This would certainly make things a lot clearer to new users:
mdadm --create /dev/md0 --metadata 1.0 --meta-location offset4k
mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 01.0
Metadata-locn : End-of-device
Creation Time : Fri Aug 4 23:05:02 2006
Raid Level : raid0
And there you have the deprecation... only two superblock versions and no real
changes to code etc
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
