[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Question regarding XFS on LVM over hardware RAID.

To: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Question regarding XFS on LVM over hardware RAID.
From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 20:21:27 -0600
Cc: "C. Morgan Hamill" <chamill@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20140221095742.0ca161b0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <52E91923.4070706@xxxxxxxxxxx> <52EB3B96.7000103@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1391202273-sup-9265@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <52ED61C9.8060504@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140202212152.GP2212@dastard> <1391443675-sup-1730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140203214128.GR13997@dastard> <52F09E36.8050606@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1392748390-sup-1943@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5303E7AC.50903@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140220183125.29149.64880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5306C90B.1000904@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140221095742.0ca161b0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
On 2/21/2014 2:57 AM, Emmanuel Florac wrote:
> Le Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:33:31 -0600 vous écriviez:
>> Forget all of this.  Forget RAID60.  I think you'd be best served by a
>> concatenation.
> I fully  agree, though I'd use... LVM to perform the concatenation,
> much more convenient and easy to use than md IMO.

Using md linear eliminates the LVM physical extent size non power of 2
misalignment issue we discussed at length up thread.  Using LVM makes
things decidedly more difficult and for zero gain.  LVM just isn't
appropriate for Morgan's situation.

Now, it's possible he could do this entirely in the RAID firmware.
However he has not stated which storage product he has, and thus I don't
know its capabilities, whether it can create or seamlessly expand a
concatenation.  Linux md can do all of this very easily and is deployed
by many people in this exact scenario.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>