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

Re: RFC: Switching guided partitioning to LVM by default?

On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 04:06:49PM -0400, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Is anyone aware of any drawbacks of switching to LVM by default?

- It makes sharing the disk with other operating systems harder: partman
  requires that the LVM PVs are committed to disk before you can play
  around with LVs, and since "use the whole disk" creates a single
  whole-disk partition for the LVM PV, there will be no space left for
  the other operating system if that does not support Linux's LVM.

  A user who would wish to create a partition for an alternate operating
  system after going through the LVM step would have to destroy all LVM
  LVs, destroy the VG, destroy the PVs, change the size of the
  partition, and then recreate everyhing again.
- Last I checked (but this may have been changed), the LVM VG created by
  the partitioner is given a default name, which confuses the kernel if
  you place a disk containing another LVM VG with that same name in the
  same machine. This makes recovering a system by placing its disk into
  a different machine needlessly complicated.
- While LVM is indeed more flexible than plain partitions, it does add
  some overhead in terms of metadata, which is not necessarily useful if
  the user is only interested in installing to a single hard disk.

All in all, I'm not convinced that switching this default will be a net
plus for our users.

Could you people please use IRC like normal people?!?

  -- Amaya Rodrigo Sastre, trying to quiet down the buzz in the DebConf 2008

Reply to: