[lvm-devel] [BUG-REPORT] mirror legs in the same PV with --alloc anywhere
malahal at us.ibm.com
malahal at us.ibm.com
Fri Apr 16 18:50:33 UTC 2010
Takahiro Yasui [tyasui at redhat.com] wrote:
> > Or would it be better to implement 1s+2+3 as the first new policy?
>
> I don't think the requirement '1s' is necessary, but But I rather
> think that the policy 'normal' supports the following condition.
>
> 1. The number of PVs must be more than the number of mirror legs,
> 2. M1 and M2 not on same PV as each other,
> 3. L1 and L2 not on same PV as each other,
> 4. L* may share PVs with M* if the number of PVs are less than
> the total number of L* and M*.
>
> I think that some users expect that the number of mirror legs are
> devices users should take care of but 'mirror log' is a logical
> device LVM2 take care of.
I am with Taka here. The normal policy should be the default and it
should do the following for the mirroredlog without introducing a new
policy.
Requirement: Number of allocatable PV's should be at least the number of
mirror legs
Allocation: Allocate images on different PVs. Allocate logs on remaining
PVs in a round robin fashion. If there are more PV's, we
will not have to share L* and M* at all.
It would be different for disklog though:
Requirement: Number of allocatable PV's should be at least one more than
the number of mirror legs.
Allocation: Just use round-robin sequence
Thanks, Malahal.
More information about the lvm-devel
mailing list