Doug,
Yup this would be ideal and I think this is what EVMS tries to do,
although I haven't tried it.
The advantage of doing such a thing would also be that MD could be made
to work with shared LVM VGs for shared storage environments.
now to write the code...
-steve
Doug Ledford wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 12:57:42PM -0700, Steven Dake wrote:
>
>
>>Doug,
>>
>>EVMS integrates all of this stuff together into one cohesive peice of
>>technology.
>>
>>But I agree, LVM should be modified to support RAID 1 and RAID 5, or MD
>>should be modified to support volume management. Since RAID 1 and RAID
>>5 are easier to implement, LVM is probably the best place to put all
>>this stuff.
>>
>>
>
>Yep. I tend to agree there. A little work to make device mapping modular
>in LVM, and a little work to make the md modules plug into LVM, and you
>could be done. All that would be left then is adding the right stuff into
>the user space tools. Basically, what irks me about the current situation
>is that right now in the Red Hat installer, if I want LVM features I have
>to create one type of object with a disk, and if I want reasonable
>software RAID I have to create another type of object with partitions.
>That shouldn't be the case, I should just create an LVM logical volume,
>assign physical disks to it, and then additionally assign the redundancy
>or performance layout I want (IMNSHO) :-)
>
>
>
>
-
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 : Sat Nov 23 2002 - 22:00:38 EST