[dm-devel] Re: IO scheduler based IO controller V10
Andy
genanr at emsphone.com
Wed Oct 7 20:23:56 UTC 2009
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 12:41:27PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
>
> >If once dm-ioband is integrated into the LVM tools and bandwidth can
> >be assigned per device by lvcreate, the use of dm-tools is no longer
> >required for users.
>
> A lot of large data center users have a SAN, with volume management
> handled SAN-side and dedicated LUNs for different applications or
> groups of applications.
>
> Because of alignment issues, they typically use filesystems directly
> on top of the LUNs, without partitions or LVM layers. We cannot rely
> on LVM for these systems, because people prefer not to use that.
>
I am one of these people that does not use LVM, because I have no need to
with the SAN. The SAN spreads the volume across many disks, I do not need
to do it. LVM would add layers of complexity than I do not need. I do use
currently use EVMS to allow me to expand volumes without rebooting. But,
with the newer kernels I do not even need that since I can just expand the
LUN and the the filesystem (I do not use partitions either). Why was
device-mapper stuff moved into LVM2? IMHO it should have stayed separate.
Andy
More information about the dm-devel
mailing list