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 > Hi Bart, yes exactly. And this way I can have a drbd-device with a reasonable size for each service (cifs, nfs, etc) to begin with. Cheers, Oliver