SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

December 2013

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jeff Siddall <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Jeff Siddall <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 11 Dec 2013 10:00:22 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
On 12/10/2013 07:49 PM, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
>
> Well in the case of migrating from one storage array to an other newer
> bugger one the LVM migration capability is handy.
> Any one who has had to go through the pain of a SAN migration especially
> to a different SAN vendor will see the value of LVM there. That said
> that only became stable enough to really trust it on critical
> infrastructure a few years ago.
> The ease in growing a volume on a LUN comes from the fact that LVM
> volume group can span multiple logical disk partitions and or LUNs
>   although again this really only became stable enough to trust it on
> critical infrastructure a few years ago as well.
>
> Early on there were many problems with LVM but over the years its
> matured significantly I've begun to trust it more  and more since the
> release of El6, where under EL5 I absolutely refused to use it on any
> production box.

Yes, it has improved over time, but I wouldn't call it unusable in 
RHEL5.  I have a RHEL5 server which has been running LVM since it was 
installed 4 years ago, and it is at 99.996% uptime (excluding scheduled 
maintenance).

Jeff

ATOM RSS1 RSS2