[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[linux-lvm] Re: Linux LVM snmp MIB.
- From: Russell Coker <russell coker com au>
- To: Ceri Storey <ceri storey dsvr co uk>
- Cc: linux-lvm redhat com
- Subject: [linux-lvm] Re: Linux LVM snmp MIB.
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 21:32:34 +1000
On Wednesday 27 July 2005 20:26, Ceri Storey <ceri storey dsvr co uk> wrote:
> Here's a preliminary suggestion (LVM standing for 1.3.6.1.4.1.9586.100.1)
> NAME
> LVM.physicalVolume LVM.1
> LVM.volumeGroup LVM.2
> LVM.volumeGroup.groupName LVM.2.1
> LVM.volumeGroup.extentSize LVM.2.2 The size of each extent in bytes
> LVM.volumeGroup.extentCount LVM.2.3
> LVM.volumeGroup.extentFree LVM.2.4
> LVM.volumeGroup.writable LVM.2.5
> LVM.volumeGroup.resizeable LVM.2.6
> LVM.volumeGroup.exported LVM.2.7
> LVM.volumeGroup.partial LVM.2.8
> LVM.logicalVolume LVM.3 A table of devices
> LVM.logicalVolume.volumeName LVM.3.1
> LVM.logicalVolume.volumeGroup LVM.3.2
> LVM.logicalVolume.extentCount LVM.3.3 the number of extents in this
> volume LVM.logicalVolume.reads LVM.3.4 the number of extents in this
> volume LVM.logicalVolume.writes LVM.3.5 the number of extents in this
> volume
>
> Comments? Suggestions?
I think it would be nicer to have the LV entries under the VG trees. That's
the way things are done conceptually.
Also as PVs are assigned to a VG then maybe we should have the PV entries for
assigned PVs under the VG entries as well and just have a separate tree for
unassigned PVs.
But your design will work.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]