It is more like EVMS has safety devices to prevent people from
getting caught up in the machinery. In that respect it keeps
people from hurting themselves. And even if it is only when
the are tired or in a hurry it is worth the effort. When you
have several 100 servers that you need to take care of any
help is appreciate.
Since most data loss is human error having a volume manager to
enable people to have higher availability and not addressing
the number one cause of data loss doesn't seem to make sense to
me.
On Sun, 2002-07-21 at 06:40, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-07-21 at 07:57, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > One disadvantage of the LVM2 concept is that it relies a lot on compatible
> > user space and there is unlikely to be a stable API. While I'm normally
> > all for putting things in user space where it makes sense I think the
> > mounting of your root file system is a bit of exception.
>
> LVM2 relies on people doing things right so we shouldnt use it ?
>
> Strange
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-- Timothy D. Witham - Lab Director - wookie@osdlab.org Open Source Development Lab Inc - A non-profit corporation 15275 SW Koll Parkway - Suite H - Beaverton OR, 97006 (503)-626-2455 x11 (office) (503)-702-2871 (cell) (503)-626-2436 (fax)- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 23 2002 - 22:00:43 EST