<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> I use LVM2 on software and hardware raid on a regular basis. Almost every server I configure has hardware raid and all the machines I support run LVM. No problems to report. Matthew B. Brookover wrote: <blockquote cite="mid1158760524.26653.4.camel@merlin.Mines.EDU" type="cite"> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; "> <meta name="GENERATOR" content="GtkHTML/3.6.2"> I have used LVM on top of software raid and ISCSI. It works well. It also helps keep track of what device is where. ISCSI does not export its targets in the same order, some times sdb shows up as sdc.... LVM will keep track of what is what. On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 16:53 -0500, Alexander Lazarevich wrote: <blockquote type="CITE"> <pre>We have several RAID devices (16-24 drive Fiber/SCSI attached RAID) which are currently single devices on our 64bit linux servers (RHEL-4, core5). We are considering LVM'ing 2 or more of the RAID's into a LVM group. I don't doubt the reliability and robustness of LVM2 on single drives, but I worry about it on top of RAID devices. Does anyone have any experience with LVM on to of RAID volumes, positive or negative? </pre> </blockquote> </blockquote> </body> </html>