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

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM 2



I'll second this.  I've had all my data on LVM2 for months w/out
problems; I've started moving production machines over to lvm2 w/out
mishap (other than redhat's broken init system, but that's not lvm's
fault :).  I only use basic (linear) volume management; no snapshotting,
striping, etc.

Also note that I'm still using beta2 (w/ 2.4.18-ac3).

On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 03:18:23PM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
> 
> On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 02:16:44PM +0200, Anders Widman wrote:
> > 
> >    How  stable  is LVM 2
> 
> The releases tend to be very stable, cvs obviously is a little less
> so.  The core functionality (ie. simple LVs) hasn't changed for months
> - current development is focusing on pvmove and the new metadata
> format.
> 
> The snapshot facility was completed recently (including writeable
> snapshots).  Judging from the bug reports on the list they seem to be
> more stable than 1.1rc2, as well as being faster (see
> http://people.sistina.com/~thornber/snap_performance.html for a pretty
> graph).
> 
> Personally I've had all my data on LVM2 since November without mishap.
> 
[...]
> 
> - Joe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm sistina com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html

-- 
<dilinger> people fear what they don't understand
<zinx> that is not true
<zinx> most people fear what they don't understand, and the rest get killed
	by those people



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