>>>>> "Vernon" == Vernon McPherron <vernon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
[LVM vs. XFS]
Vernon> The question that I've got is... Has anyone tried it yet, and
Vernon> what issues do you think I'd encounter? Actually the biggest
Vernon> question is, is the version of XFS on the install cd play well
Vernon> with LVM, or do I need to use the current tree from cvs? (I
Vernon> noticed that the lvm is built in the "stock" xfs kernel, but I
Vernon> think it was 0.8 final.)
Our prerelease is based upon a 2.4.0 kernel, however, I think our boot
disk is still a test11 kernel. Russell/Eric, can you confirm this?
In that case our boot disk has LVM 0.8final, while the installed
kernel will be LVM 0.9. This shouldn't be a problem, as long as you
use liblvm 0.8 for the installer work and put 0.9.1beta userland on
A snapshot of LVM 0.9 was submitted Linus and applied to test12. This
submission was not endorsed by the LVM development team and there are
several issues with it.
An official 0.9.1beta3 release just got out. I'm waiting for that to
appear in the kernel before I start doing surgery to our tree. Most
notably the XFS userland utilities (mkfs) will have to be updated to
talk the 0.9 IOP protocol to extract stripe size etc. (You can always
do that by hand, though).
So, to be quite honest: The state of LVM in 2.4.0 is a mess. If I
we're you I'd hold off for a week or two until the developers finish
up a proper release. Otherwise grab 0.9.1beta tarball from
sistina.com and apply that to an XFS prerelease source tree.
Martin K. Petersen, Principal Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
Linuxcare. Moving Forward.