Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 10:15:33PM +0100, Lars Ellenberg wrote: > > I would personally prefer running LVM on top of drbd. That way you can > > just add more drbd-protected devices and chop up the space as you see fit > > with LVM, etc. Much easier to deal with growing stuff. > > But much harder for eventual disk failures. > Node failure: ok, no problem. > But if a single "PV" fails, you have to failover the full "VG". > Ok, you could just let the node in question commit suicide for > this, but... Right, sorry, I didn't get into the device details. I'm assuming that you either have an already protected device (either hardware raid or md), resulting in the following stack: fs lv vg pv drbd md/hardware disks > You need to use LVM2 for this to work. Yup! That's the situation so far. -- Kees Cook Open Source Development Lab kees at osdl.org