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

Re: Which Volume Manager?

On Thu, 2002-11-07 at 04:35, Ross Boylan wrote:
> I am running a 2.4.19 debianized kernel, built from source, and would
> like to use a volume manager.  I would appreciate any advice or
> clarification of the level of debian support for the different
> managers.  I am trying to run basically a testing system.
> There seem to be 3 configurations:
> LVM10  from Sistina (the 1.0 version of LVM)
> LVM2   from Sistina, beta (2.0 version of LVM)
> EVMS   from IBM
> I think each additionally requires a separate set of kernel patches to
> compile, and LVM2  also depends on a "device mapper" (libdevmapper0),
> which may have a kernel component also.
> Since LVM2 is beta, missing many features, and seems to have a
> showstopper bug
> (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=163020)--though
> severity is marked as normal--I'd say it's out.
> Some comments on one of the debian installer list described EVMS as
> intriguing but untested; my search of the net seems to show it's well
> thought of by its few users, but the kernel team doesn't like the
> internals.  The kernel team didn't like LVM version 1 either, and I
> believe its presence in the development kernels has been terminated
> with extreme prejudice.
> EVMS and LVM both seem to be out of the planned 2.6 kernel, while
> LVM2, or at least some elements, are in
> (http://www.kernelnewbies.org/status/latest.html).  The EVMS team
> responded to this and the kernel team's comments by deciding on a major
> rearchitecting of that package
> (announced 11/5.  See
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=103653726515692&w=2). 
> Both EVMS and LVM2 should be able to read LVM volumes.
> EVMS currently appears to have a richer set of client tools (even a
> gui interface), and to be a more ambitious project than LVM.  This has
> its good and bad points.  I like the positive things its users say
> about the system and the developers, as well as the apparent maturity
> and seriousness of the developers in their posts, but am concerned by
> the relative newness to Linux and the fact that it appears to be
> another one of these doomed but noble IBM attempts to build software
> that pluggably adapts to any operating system or requirement.
> In view of all this, can anyone suggest which, if any, of the volume
> managers to use right now, and tell me what I need to do to get it
> working?  Info on which way the wind is blowing on debian's choice of
> volume managers would be highly relevant.
> On the latter, my suspicion is that for evms I apply kernel-patch-evms
> and rebuild my kernel, using the available tools packages.  I suspect
> that for LVM I may only need to enable the relevant options in the
> kernel and rebuild, again using the tools packages.  Any confirmation
> or denial of these theories would be great.

Last week's LWN (now freely available) is mentioning that LVM2 is
supposed to be going into the 2.6 kernel, and that EVMS will adjust its
tools to work with LVM2. Have I missed something since then that says
that changed? I don't follow the discussions of the kernel developers,
so that is a possibility.
ML Kahnt New Markets Consulting
Tel: (613) 531-8684 / (613) 539-0935
Email: kahnt@hosehead.dyndns.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: