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 1Q3c7O-0005Wh-8q for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:38:02 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 92C641C040; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:36:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-gw0-f53.google.com (mail-gw0-f53.google.com [74.125.83.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552DB1C040 for ; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:36:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gwj20 with SMTP id 20so635892gwj.40 for ; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:36:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=EnASCBN1166Y01xKfet181Os+bxUAMAYMgK0UxXNQW0=; b=mZi0h7TcVlawfgDadJ38eTIkdKqcXRxKWxnO9uzaanDES4ZhSmKbFoXYhUQLn8zNFr em6rToSYI36K3N9TUXFWEODpXVwkXNrXQ9C/41gfm7pe0W49FDa+ZumiQPDKNStVbsao YY9D9zh4SM/SQkU411QStfA+CbUs2QY9zOsds= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=joqp9Nv5b3VoocmzdwXwilxFnzjtRvTK8DjMkD79gQL1S8G+BY495q5iPVYtnh4br/ SbRNiOkZSRXJ625vox4w8krjWQbG27JtgsrLSRCAC20Zye9+xADNbfeOOis9oGk7zk8X x38Wp8RPykl2s+v1pgyhcn/52d+GgoG1aD5oo= 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 Received: by 10.150.49.14 with SMTP id w14mr2288285ybw.347.1301178979399; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.138.5 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:36:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4D8E66C0.6080305@gmail.com> References: <20110326190630.GA2406@gaurahari> <2257101.Z5VrWX5cNr@nazgul> <4D8E66C0.6080305@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:36:19 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] LVM (Was: the best filesystem for server: XFS or JFS (or?)) From: Mark Knecht To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Cc: Dale Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 735938726f6b4d0eaee6451afc1b4326 On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Dale wrote: > Alan McKinnon wrote: >> >> On Saturday 26 March 2011 15:06:31 Elaine C. Sharpe wrote: >> >>>> >>>> Just because something works for most people, doesn't mean it will for >>>> everyone either. =C2=A0If you lose data, it doesn't matter. =C2=A0LVM = just adds >>>> one more layer of something to go wrong. =C2=A0Me, I don't need the ex= tra >>>> risk of having a system that doesn't boot and a loss of data. =C2=A0I'= m sure >>>> there are a lot of people that see it the way I do too. =C2=A0They jus= t >>>> don't >>>> need the extra risk. >>>> >>> >>> Using the least number of layers of abstraction you can get away with i= s >>> 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. >>> >> >> There's an elephant in this room. The number of actual layers is greater >> than >> just LVM plus FS. It's whatever the BIOS (or a reasonable substitute is >> doing), plus the drive firmware, kernel driver(s) - there's more than on= e >> of >> those - plus any RAID in use (hardware or software) and finally the file >> system. >> >> That's a lot of layers, a lot of code, a lot of opportunity for people t= o >> reveal the extent of their lack of knowledge. I've often heard it said >> that >> code like ZFS and brtfs eliminates several of these layers therefore it'= s >> technically a better option. That may be true, but let me just point out >> that >> whatever LVM+fs+other_stuff is doing as separate chunks of code also get= s >> done >> by ZFS etc. You just don't see it, and just because it's abstracted away >> doesn't mean it's not there. >> >> > > I'll add this. =C2=A0Alan if I recall correctly runs a lot of systems. = =C2=A0He has a > boatload of experience using all sorts of software/hardware. =C2=A0Me, I = don't. > =C2=A0For the longest, I had one system and that was it. =C2=A0If I upgra= de my kernel, > LVM, or some package that LVM depends on and I can't boot, I'm screwed. = =C2=A0If > I can't boot, I can't google anything to find out how to fix it. =C2=A0I = also > don't know enough about LVM to fix it myself. =C2=A0Since there is so man= y layers > of things that can already go wrong on a system, adding one more layer th= at > can be complicated only makes a problem grow. > > I'm sure Alan and many others could go out and buy or build a new system = and > put LVM on it and fix about any problem that comes along. =C2=A0Thing is,= there > are others that can't. =C2=A0Add to this that when I was thinking about u= sing it, > I read where a lot of people, for whatever reason, couldn't get it back > working again and lost data. =C2=A0For me, I don't care if it was LVM its= elf, the > kernel or some combination of other things, if I can't boot or lose data, > the result is the same. =C2=A0I can fix a kernel problem, a broken packag= e but if > LVM fails, I'm stuck. > > That said, I now have a second rig. =C2=A0I may at some point use LVM bec= ause I > can always go to the other room and use my old rig to get help. =C2=A0I a= lready > have a 750Gb drive that is about full of pictures, I got a camera and get= a > little happy at times, and videos I have downloaded, everything from TV > series to stuff off youtube. =C2=A0I may buy another large drive and use = LVM or > something to give me more room since I really don't want to have to break= up > my filing system across two separate drives. =C2=A0I won't consider putti= ng the > booting part of my OS on LVM tho. > > Of course, I did see a 3Tb drive on sale the other day at newegg. =C2=A0o= _O =C2=A0That > would last a while. =C2=A0;-) > > Dale > > :-) =C2=A0:-) Dale, I understand your position and concerns. While I have a number of systems, I have little time or patience for dealing with a lot of this stuff and LVM has been one of them. One thing I'm considering to try out LVM is a second Gentoo installation on an already running system. It will either be a 50GB partition of its own, or a Virtualbox VM. I'd do the normal Gentoo install for LVM, figure out how it works, etc., and then decide if I want to use it in the future. After all, as Neil said, if something offers features we don't feel we need then why buy it? - Mark