From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 10 17:35:42 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E17D716A4CE; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 17:35:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from nebula.skynet.be (nebula.skynet.be [195.238.2.112]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7347543D49; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 17:35:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brad.knowles@skynet.be) Received: from [10.0.1.4] (16.139-200-80.adsl.skynet.be [80.200.139.16]) id i0B1ZTGC020361; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:35:30 +0100 (envelope-from ) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: bs663385@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <40007D14.6090205@freebsd.org> References: <40007D14.6090205@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:35:38 +0100 To: Scott Long From: Brad Knowles Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.3(snapshot 20030212) (nebula.skynet.be) cc: hackers@freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Future of RAIDFrame X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 01:35:43 -0000 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, "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(+++)