Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:38:51 +0100 | From | Heinz Mauelshagen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 000 of 5] md: Introduction |
| |
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 11:26:01AM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > On 2006-01-23T10:44:18, Heinz Mauelshagen <mauelshagen@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Besides, stacking between dm devices so far (ie, if I look how kpartx > > > does it, or LVM2 on top of MPIO etc, which works just fine) is via the > > > block device layer anyway - and nothing stops you from putting md on top > > > of LVM2 LVs either. > > > > > > I use the regularly to play with md and other stuff... > > > > Me too but for production, I want to avoid the > > additional stacking overhead and complexity. > > Ok, I still didn't get that. I must be slow. > > Did you implement some DM-internal stacking now to avoid the above > mentioned complexity? > > Otherwise, even DM-on-DM is still stacked via the block device > abstraction...
No, not necessary because a single-level raid4/5 mapping will do it. Ie. it supports <offset> parameters in the constructor as other targets do as well (eg. mirror or linear).
> > > Sincerely, > Lars Marowsky-Brée > > -- > High Availability & Clustering > SUSE Labs, Research and Development > SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin > "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
--
Regards, Heinz -- The LVM Guy --
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Red Hat GmbH Consulting Development Engineer Am Sonnenhang 11 Cluster and Storage Development 56242 Marienrachdorf Germany Mauelshagen@RedHat.com +49 2626 141200 FAX 924446 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - 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/
| |