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

Re: WinBlow$ Home Server equivalent



Stefan Monnier wrote:
but the marketing brief seems to suggest that if you lose a drive you
only lose the files that were on there. with lvm you would lose any lv that has blocks on that drive

Not sure what Windows really guarantees in this regard, but yes, losing
a drive that is part of a larger volume is a problem.  In many/most
cases you can actually recover all the files that are still on the
remaining drives, but it might take a bit of work (typically, you have
to tell LVM to use something similar to /dev/zero as a replacement for
you failed drive, and then you run `fsck' on your filesystem(s) which
will give you tons of errors and will recover most of the files (plus
others which actually aren't correct but where the missing bits have
silently been replaced by zeroes)).

As a general rule, you're better off relying on backups or RAID to
handle such situations anyway.  Or seen from another point of view: if
it's OK with you to lose an arbitrarily chosen 1/3 or 1/2 of your data,
then why would you mind losing it all instead?


As has been mentioned in another thread, RAID 1 pairs with LVM is pretty safe and flexible. The disadvantage is when adding more capacity, you have to add drives in pairs.

ZFS (formerly Zetta File System) can do all this and more beside, but right now, with one exception, you have to do all the thinking yourself, it's not just a matter of adding a new drive and walking away. The exception? Very expensive storage appliances from Sun. Those run something, OpenSolaris maybe (haven't bothered to look it up), with ZFS. Of course, expanding requires you to go back to Sun.

MArk Allums


Reply to: