Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:35:38 +0100 From: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Future of RAIDFrame Message-ID: <p06002058bc265785c9c7@[10.0.1.4]> In-Reply-To: <40007D14.6090205@freebsd.org> References: <40007D14.6090205@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 3:30 PM -0700 2004/01/10, Scott Long wrote:
> It will probably never be an LVM stack, but I've also always
> believed that LVM and RAID are related but separate layers.
Having looked at the RAIDframe documentation you referenced, it
strikes me that it cannot really move towards LVM and still be
RAIDframe. It is a framework for doing rapid prototyping of RAID
systems (and presumably their operation), and is available on a wide
variety of platforms. To do anything else would be to change the
fundamental nature of the beast.
> It can
> certainly build upon whatever LVM layer appears in GEOM.
My experience has been that a good RAID/LVM system also needs a
lot of support from the filesystem, and skimming through the
RAIDframe documentation, it seems that I am not alone in this
opinion. What work has been done (or identified) to make the
filesystem more suitable for use with RAID/LVM systems? At the most
basic, do we have things like "growfs" and "shrinkfs"?
--
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06002058bc265785c9c7>