Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:03:26 +0300
From:      "Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@FreeBSD.org>
To:        "Matthew X. Economou" <xenophon@irtnog.org>
Cc:        stable@freebsd.org, fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: gmirror disks vs partitions
Message-ID:  <cb5206420701170603u176ee53creff1ecbc8a5f5fbd@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <B9638CACBA387E48927BB56B6A1555070D9E41@svr1.irtnog.org>
References:  <20070117103935.GC4018@genius.tao.org.uk> <B9638CACBA387E48927BB56B6A1555070D9E41@svr1.irtnog.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1/17/07, Matthew X. Economou <xenophon@irtnog.org> wrote:
> > Apart from potentially avoiding a whole disk from being copied
> > during a resync after a crash, are there any other advantages to
> > using partition level mirroring instead of drive level mirroring?
>
> Joe,
>
> Partition-level software RAID plus LVM is how the following Slashdot
> poster manages extendable (and inequally sized disk) arrays on Linux:
>
> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=169386&cid=14117414

[...after reading the slashdotter's piece of wisdom...]

Yes, but that's the kind of functionality I have always
expected to be present in software raid solutions. I
hope I'll live to see this implemented in geom.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cb5206420701170603u176ee53creff1ecbc8a5f5fbd>