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

Re: Installation plays hardball



On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 15:02 -0500, Chris Tyler wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 19:47 +0000, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > Somewhat OT: IMHO one thing that makes installing Fedora harder than it
> > needs to be for the majority of users is the default use of LVM. I've
> > been using Fedora since before it was Fedora, and have *never* had a
> > situation in which LVM was any use to me. I understand the benefits it
> > brings to large installations with complex and varying storage
> > requirements, but that's not the case for most people and having to deal
> > with its highly domain-specific terminology turns it into a mental
> > obstacle that would be better avoided.
> 
> I thought that both LVM technology and its benefits were widely
> understood by now. It has a lot of value even in a single-disk
> situation: you can shuffle space between filesystems, migrate data to a
> new disk, add space from a new disk to an existing filesystem, and
> create a copy-on-write snapshot of a filesystem -- and do most of that
> while the system is running. It's saved my bacon more times than I want
> to admit.

Clearly we have different needs. I've never needed to do any of those
things without stopping the system. In fact the "adding space" thing is
probably what looks most attractive, but I'm paranoid about disk failure
so I can't see myself ever expanding a filesystem across more than one
physical partition. I do realize that for a large multi-user
installation with RAID drives and whatnot LVM is the bee's knees, but on
my desktop I just make do with a judicious use of symlinks. 

> Rather than remove LVM from the default installation, perhaps we need to
> do a better job of explaining what it does and how to use it
> effectively.

That's true independently of whether LVM is the default or not.

poc


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