Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On 01/06/2011 12:45 PM, J. Ryan Earl wrote: > On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Lentes, Bernd > <bernd.lentes at helmholtz-muenchen.de > <mailto:bernd.lentes at helmholtz-muenchen.de>> wrote: > > Digimer wrote: > > >> > > > > > > I don't want to setup a DRBD as a PV. My idea is to set up > > a DRBD on top of a LV, and to format or not format this LV, > > depending on the decision to install a KVM into a file or a > > plain device. > > > Is this setup ok ? > >I don't want to use a DRBD as a PV. > > My setup is like that: > > <hardware raid> > | > <partition> > | > <PV(s)> > | > <VG> > | > <LV(s)> > | > <DRBD> > | > <FS or vm in a plain LV> > > > This should work ? > Which setup did you discuss with RH ? Your old one or mine ? > > > He talked about his. Your setup is fine. You can use the DRBD devices > directly as disks for VMs, it is in fact a great practice with > dual-primaries. Using a file on a filesystem for the VM disk will add > considerable overhead and complication. > > -JR I agree with JR. Past experience showed me that VMs on dedicated LVs was much preferable to file-based VMs. -- Digimer E-Mail: digimer at alteeve.com AN!Whitepapers: http://alteeve.com Node Assassin: http://nodeassassin.org