[linux-lvm] Misleading documentation (was: HDD Failure)

[Tobias Bluhm]

Scott Lamb wrote on 09/19/2006 06:40:43 PM:

> On Sep 18, 2006, at 12:37 PM, Mark Krenz wrote:
> >   LVM != RAID
> >
> >   You should have been doing RAID if you wanted to be able to 
> > handle the
> > failure of one drive.
> 
> This is my biggest beef with LVM - why doesn't *any* of the 
> documentation point this out? There are very few good reasons to use 
> LVM without RAID, and "ignorance" certainly isn't among them. I don't 
> see any mention of RAID or disk failures in the manual pages or in 
> the HOWTO.

Good point. So if the docs make no mention of RAID or fail-over or 
redundency or spares, what made you assume that 
LVM had such capabilities????