From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Q30sy-00035j-9x for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:52:40 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1CC571C01A; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:51:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq3.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq3.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.34.166]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D805C1C01A for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:51:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.34.143] (helo=smtp12.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq3.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q30rb-0007or-9X for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 07:51:15 +0100 Received: from 5353c7ed.cm-6-4d.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([83.83.199.237] helo=data.antarean.org) by smtp12.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q30ra-0002by-J9 for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 07:51:14 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC9A241D for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 07:52:09 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from data.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (data.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w4kNskjGwJdO for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 07:52:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from eve.localnet (eve.lan.antarean.org [10.20.13.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FD431085 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 07:52:09 +0100 (CET) From: Joost Roeleveld To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] LVM (Was: the best filesystem for server: XFS or JFS (or?)) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 07:51:13 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/4.6 beta4 (Linux/2.6.36-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.6.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <4d8bb292.8461df0a.57dd.0ee1@mx.google.com> References: <4D87A7C6.1060502@gmail.com> <6382559.dddi5o1M78@nazgul> <4d8bb292.8461df0a.57dd.0ee1@mx.google.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <20110325065209.6DC9A241D@data.antarean.org> X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-ID: 1Q30ra-0002by-J9 X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-SpamCheck: geen spam, SpamAssassin (niet cached, score=-0.851, vereist 5, BAYES_00 -1.90, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.98, TW_LV 0.08, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.01) X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-From: joost@antarean.org X-Spam-Status: No X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: fa2600783d3ffaf458b661c7cb8f6c59 On Thursday 24 March 2011 22:07:28 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > On Thursday 24 March 2011 12:08:02 Alan McKinnon wrote: > > On Thursday 24 March 2011 12:19:39 Dale wrote: > > > I have never used LVM but when it messes up after a upgrade, as has > > > happened to many others, see if you say the same thing. I hope your > > > backups are good and they can restore. > > > > What is this "mess up after an upgrade" of which you speak? > > > > I've used multiple versions of LVM on multiple machines across multiple > > distros for multiple years and never once heard of anyone having a > > problem with it let along experienced one myself. > > > > Shades of FUD methinks. > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=lvm > or if you like a bit of history: Not all of these are LVM, some are only shown because they're related to llvm (Which is a virtual machine), but lets ignore those all-together :) On the first page, at first glance, I don't see any serious ones that are only LVM. The boot-issue was caused by genkernel not being up-to-date with name-changes. > http://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL+lvm > there you go. See above > I like this one: > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=350455 Looks like an issue with heavy I/O, affecting the LVM layer trying to lock the filesystem. But I wonder if he's not running into a known issue (which can easily be worked around) where pvmove has a memory-leak with the reporting. (eg. the bit that checks the progress every 5 seconds, reducing that to every 5 minutes significantly reduces that) However, I do believe this (mem-leak) was fixed. Am curious what the result will be of that. Please note, I do not run masked (~amd64) kernels. Kind regards, Joost Roeleveld