Re: [gentoo-user] LVM (Was: the best filesystem for server: XFS or JFS (or?))

["Elaine C. Sharpe" <elaine@southernstarsolutions.com>]

In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote:
> Elaine C. Sharpe wrote:
>> In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote:
>>    
>>>
>>> Yep, I read about others having problems and loosing data.
>>>
>>> Dale
>>>
>>> :-)  :-)
>>>      
>> You can read about others having problems and losing data with pretty
>> much every bit of software ever coded. *Lots* of people are not particularly
>> competent and write horroe stories or bad reviews without bothering to
>> mention the errors they made which actually caused the problem.
>> I see evidence of that on this very list daily. So IMO your method is
>> a bit suspect. :)
>>
>>    
>
> The opposite can be said too.  I seem to recall hal working for a lot of 
> people but for me, it was a miserable failure and forced me into a hard 
> reset.
>

So, if your method doesn't really work very well but you invert it and 
see that then it doesn't work well either that validates the original choice?
:)

> Just because something works for most people, doesn't mean it will for 
> everyone either.  If you lose data, it doesn't matter.  LVM just adds 
> one more layer of something to go wrong.  Me, I don't need the extra 
> risk of having a system that doesn't boot and a loss of data.  I'm sure 
> there are a lot of people that see it the way I do too.  They just don't 
> need the extra risk.
>

Using the least number of layers of abstraction you can get away with is
a perfectly valid criteria. What I was pointing out was that informal
polls of users with a sad story to tell is not a very effective way to 
conduct research. People say all kinds of things that just aren't true.

-- 
...she kept arranging and rearranging the rabbit and kind of waving to it. I decided, "this is the person I want to sit next to".