[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Optionally-partitioned devices



You're right, Dan. It just happens that "fakeraid" is the only term
other than "software raid" that came to me, and I wanted to
differentiate bios-raid from mdraid. I'll try to stick with "bios-raid"
from now on. "External metadata raid", despite seeeming most correct, is
just too many characters.

Dave

On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 09:53 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> David Lehman wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I'd like to get a better idea of the perceived usefulness of
> > optionally-partitioned devices. There are two basic examples:
> > 
> >  - whole-disk filesystem, lvm pv, md component, &c (no partition table)
> >  - partitioned md devices
> > 
> > We seem to have set out on this road to some extent by accepting patches
> > to use the md subsystem for some fakeraid formats, but I'm wondering how
> > far we want to go. Do we want to support creation of filesystems and
> > other formatting on disks with no disklabel? Do we want to support the
> > creation of disklabels on md devices other than fakeraid arrays?
> 
> Just a note, can we stop calling them fakeraid arrays?  There is nothing 
> fake about Linux software RAID.  'bios-raid', 'platform-raid', 'external 
> metadata raid', or just 'software raid' are more appropriate.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
> Anaconda-devel-list redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]