Re: The case against LVM

[Gilboa Davara <gilboad gmail com>]

On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 21:40 +0930, Tim wrote:
> Tim:
> >> I'm curious about two things:  Wouldn't resizing LVM involve fragmenting
> >> the drive, in another way? 
> 
> Ewan Mac Mahon:
> > Only physically; if I allocate space to one filesystem, then create
> > another, then extend the first one then the physical storage for the
> > first one will be in two chunks with the second fs sitting between them.
> > The point of LVM is that I don't need to care about it since it appears
> > as a single logical space. 
> 
> Isn't that the situation with fragmentation of any sort, though?  The
> heads having to skate about more, and only the drive really knows where
> all the bits are (pun intended). 

Yes.
But unless you're using tiny block size (<1MB, default is 32MB, I
usually use 64MB) the performance hit will go unnoticed.

- Gilboa