[DRBD-user] The old question: drbd on lvm or vice versa?

Bart Coninckx bart.coninckx at telenet.be
Wed May 26 19:55:09 CEST 2010

Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.


On Wednesday 26 May 2010 19:36:33 Oliver Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi list!
> 
> I searched the web but I only found lvm on drbd and many problems
> concerning kvm or xen. I need lvm and drbd to have a flexible
> file server (without xen or the like).
> 
> If I put lvm on top of drbd I run into problems. Such as a complex
> failover situation and I am limited to the physical space of a HD or
> partitions.
> Thus I think drbd on lvm would be better. In the end I want a
> drbd- and pacemaker- based file server with nfs and cifs and iSCSI.
> Plus I want to add one or more HD easily whenever needed or provide
> more or less disk space for a client or a share.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Thanks for suggestions!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Oliver
> _______________________________________________
> drbd-user mailing list
> drbd-user at lists.linbit.com
> http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user
> 

Oliver,

I put DRBD on top of LVM for one sole reason: being able to resize DRBD 
resources if I would ever need to. Without LVM below it, it's much riskier 
(see DRBD manual).
I also put LVM at the same time on top of DRBD (see "nested LVM" in the DRBD 
manual) which works great, provided you change /etc/lvm/lvm.conf 
About the complex failover situation: if you have cluster software taking care 
of this, it should not be referred to any more as being "complex". Setting 
that software up might be however.

Hope this helps,


Bart



More information about the drbd-user mailing list