* [linux-lvm] IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community
@ 2000-06-14 21:18 benr
2000-06-14 23:21 ` Andi Kleen
2000-06-15 6:19 ` [linux-lvm] " Andreas Dilger
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: benr @ 2000-06-14 21:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm, linux-kernel, linux-fsdevel
Cc: reiser, sbest, peloquin, andrea, okeefe, wiegand,
Stephen C. Tweedie, venditti, Mauelshagen
Hello!
Since IBM has begun to publicly support Linux, many of our customers have
started showing an interest in Linux. We have received many requests from
our customers asking us to enhance certain areas of Linux (logical volume
management in particular) in order to make Linux a more acceptable platform
for their IT operations. Furthermore, we have been asked to provide a
migration path from existing platforms (both IBM and non-IBM) to Linux.
IBM has been moving to satisfy these requests by contributing developers
and technology to the Linux Community. This is what drove IBM's decision
to release JFS to the Linux Community, and it is driving the decision to
release logical volume management technology to the Linux Community.
IBM is releasing one of its most advanced architectures for a Logical
Volume Management System. This architecture is quite interesting as it
completely integrates all disk and volume management into a single, highly
extensible, easy to use entity. We hope that the release of this
technology will lead to a world class logical volume management system for
Linux, one which satisfies the requirements of our customers as well as
those of the Linux Community.
The first of several white papers describing the LVMS architecture can be
found at the IBM Linux Technology Center website:
http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linux/
Since we would like to have an honest, open discussion about this, I would
suggest that all interested parties post their comments to the LVM mailing
list (unless someone has a better suggestion!). All comments are welcome!
Thanks!
Ben Rafanello
IBM Linux Technology Center
PS - Information about the LVM mailing list can be found at:
http://linux.msede.com/lvm/mlist/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community
2000-06-14 21:18 [linux-lvm] IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community benr
@ 2000-06-14 23:21 ` Andi Kleen
2000-06-15 6:19 ` [linux-lvm] " Andreas Dilger
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2000-06-14 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: benr; +Cc: linux-lvm, sbest, andrea
On Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 05:18:26PM -0400, benr@us.ibm.com wrote:
> The first of several white papers describing the LVMS architecture can be
> found at the IBM Linux Technology Center website:
>
> http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linux/
>
> Since we would like to have an honest, open discussion about this, I would
> suggest that all interested parties post their comments to the LVM mailing
> list (unless someone has a better suggestion!). All comments are welcome!
The stacking of multiple block translation modules seems to be already
implemented in 2.4-latest, although it is a bit of a hack and SMP
unfriendly.
The white paper talks about software RAID. Do you plan to release an
own software RAID implementation or just a port of the existing MD ?
-Andi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [linux-lvm] Re: IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community
2000-06-14 21:18 [linux-lvm] IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community benr
2000-06-14 23:21 ` Andi Kleen
@ 2000-06-15 6:19 ` Andreas Dilger
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Dilger @ 2000-06-15 6:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: benr; +Cc: Linux LVM mailing list
Ben Rafanello writes:
> IBM is releasing one of its most advanced architectures for a Logical
> Volume Management System. This architecture is quite interesting as it
> completely integrates all disk and volume management into a single, highly
> extensible, easy to use entity. We hope that the release of this
> technology will lead to a world class logical volume management system for
> Linux, one which satisfies the requirements of our customers as well as
> those of the Linux Community.
It isn't clear from the white paper how the LVMS you describe relates
to the existing Linux LVM and/or IBM's AIX/OS2 LVM developments.
Is the LVMS described going to allow breaking up of "logical partitions"
(which appear to be the same as DOS or BSD partitions) into "logical
extents (LE)" of a fixed size (e.g. 4MB)? Having smaller fixed-size LEs
are very important in terms of being able to manage the space properly.
Unfortunately, in IBM's LVM there is already something called a "logical
partition" which doesn't appear to be the same thing you refer to in
the white paper, so this is a bit confusing.
From looking at the separate LVMS components, it appears that the Linux
kernel already has a majority of the functionality for this (e.g. RAID 0,
RAID 1 (mirroring, drive linking), RAID 5, partition managers, many device
managers). Having it implemented in the LVMS framework would still be
(IMHO) a very good thing, as it makes things considerably more modular.
One thing that I'm not too sure about is why the filesystem interface
modules (FIMs) need to be able to do things like fsck and mkfs? I
can understand that resizing the filesystem needs co-operation between
the LVM and the filesystem. However, it also sounds like you would
incorporate fsck and mkfs to be functions that the kernel could call -
why is this?
One thing that is not very clear is if IBM will be leveraging its AIX/OS2
code for the LVM, or will this essentially be a new implementation?
It would be good to hear that IBM is making its LVM available, as it is a
very stable, mature code base. It does sound like the LVMS described
has more functionality than the existing AIX LVM, because it has to deal
with the morass of partition formats and filesystems that exist under
Linux. Also, the plug-in support sounds like a good improvement over
the existing LVM implementations, since it brings the various disk
"drivers" like LVM/RAID/encryption/partition into a cohesive framework.
Cheers, Andreas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Re: IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community
@ 2000-06-19 22:58 benr
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: benr @ 2000-06-19 22:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Allen; +Cc: linux-lvm
Mark,
While I can not talk about IBM's high availability products (different
product group within the company), I can say that high availability was a
consideration in our design, and that it can be handled through plug-ins.
Ben
Mark Allen <mallen@tuxtops.com>@msede.com on 06/16/2000 06:00:46 pm
Sent by: owner-linux-lvm@msede.com
To: Ben Rafanello/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc: linux-lvm@msede.com
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Re: IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux
Community
benr@us.ibm.com wrote:
> Hello everyone. Sorry for the delay in responding. Here is something I
> posted to Slashdot. I think it answers some questions and gives a little
> context for what IBM is doing. I'll try to begin answering the specific
> questions that have been submitted this afternoon.
I'm really excited that IBM is considering releasing their LVM
technology -- JFS and the LVM were really the best features of AIX by
far.
Could you address the prospect of IBM's LVM incorporating "shared"
volume groups like the commercial high-availablity software (IBM's
HA/CMP or HP's Service Guard or Sun's HA offering). That kind of
software would allow a disk group to transfer to another system if the
main host failed.
Would something like that be a "feature plug-in" in the framework which
was proposed in the white paper?
Regards,
Mark
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [linux-lvm] Re: IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community
2000-06-16 16:45 benr
@ 2000-06-16 23:00 ` Mark Allen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mark Allen @ 2000-06-16 23:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: benr; +Cc: linux-lvm
benr@us.ibm.com wrote:
> Hello everyone. Sorry for the delay in responding. Here is something I
> posted to Slashdot. I think it answers some questions and gives a little
> context for what IBM is doing. I'll try to begin answering the specific
> questions that have been submitted this afternoon.
I'm really excited that IBM is considering releasing their LVM
technology -- JFS and the LVM were really the best features of AIX by
far.
Could you address the prospect of IBM's LVM incorporating "shared"
volume groups like the commercial high-availablity software (IBM's
HA/CMP or HP's Service Guard or Sun's HA offering). That kind of
software would allow a disk group to transfer to another system if the
main host failed.
Would something like that be a "feature plug-in" in the framework which
was proposed in the white paper?
Regards,
Mark
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [linux-lvm] Re: IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community
@ 2000-06-16 16:45 benr
2000-06-16 23:00 ` Mark Allen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: benr @ 2000-06-16 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-lvm
Hello everyone. Sorry for the delay in responding. Here is something I
posted to Slashdot. I think it answers some questions and gives a little
context for what IBM is doing. I'll try to begin answering the specific
questions that have been submitted this afternoon.
I see that IBM's announcement has generated some confusion as
well as many questions. I will try to answer all of
the questions I can.
First the easy ones:
1. "I wonder if this is some pie in the sky vision or if they
have any code to back this up?"
Yes, we have code. IBM has a prototype of this LVMS on at least
one of its platforms that I know of.
2. "As long as it's released under a liscense like the GPL, we
don't need to trust them "
We are currently releasing the technology to the Linux Community.
The current white paper provides a high level
view of the basic architecture. As the architecture is discussed
with the Linux Community, additional white papers
will be produced to explain, in greater detail, various aspects
of the architecture. Should things progress to the point
where we are actually releasing code for some or all of it, then
any code we release will be under the GPL.
3. "Heinz Maulshagen and team have already written an LVM for
Linux. This LVM is already in the 2.3.x series of
kernels. What is IBM's reasoning for this duplication of effort?
Might it not be more effective to assist in the
current LVM implementation instead of bringing additional
complexity? Or are there advantages in IBM's
approach to logical volume management? "
Heinz and his team have done an excellent job with their LVM.
However, we feel that our design has some
advantages, and that we are looking at the problem from a
different perspective. Let me explain.
IBM's initial concept of a logical volume management system was
not all that different from what we find in the
Linux Community today. However, over the years, IBM's concept has
evolved based upon input from our
customers, as well as usability studies performed on our customer
base. Our current concept of a logical volume
management system integrates disk partitioning and management,
bad block relocation, software RAID, encryption,
filesystems, logical volume creation, deletion, and management,
etc. into a single, coherent, open ended
architecture. All of the components of this architecture
communicate with the Logical Volume Manager, who
co-ordinates their activities and handles all interactions with
the user. The Logical Volume Manager is a single
program with three interfaces: a command line interface, a text
mode interface, and a graphical user interface.
Thus, there is a single place for the user to turn to for any
aspect of logical volume management. This makes logical
volume management easier for the user to learn and use, and it
reduces the chances for user error and data loss.
As an example of IBM's concept, lets examine the case where an
encrypted volume is to be shrunk. We will assume
that the user has already been through any authentication process
which may be required to access the encrypted
volume and has been granted full access. The user would start the
LVM. The LVM would allow the user to select a
volume. Once selected, the user would indicate that the volume
should be shrunk. The LVM would examine the
volume, find which features are in use on the volume (encryption,
in this case), find what filesystem is in use on the
volume, and then ask each feature that would be affected by the
shrink if that feature can handle having the volume
shrunk without data loss. If a feature indicates that it can NOT
handle having the volume shrunk, then the LVM
informs the user that the volume can NOT be shrunk without data
loss. If all of the features indicate that they can
handle having the volume shrunk, then the LVM would ask the
filesystem on the volume how much the filesystem
can be shrunk without data loss. If the filesystem indicates that
it can't be shrunk without losing data, the LVM will
inform the user appropriately. If the filesystem can be shrunk,
it will indicate how much it can be shrunk before
data loss begins. The LVM will then present this value to the
user and allow the user to specify how much to shrink
the volume by, limiting the user's choice to only those values
that prevent data loss. Once the user has specified how
much the volume is to be shrunk by, the LVM will then notify the
filesystem to shrink itself. Once the filesystem is
done shrinking itself, the LVM will notify the features on the
volume that the volume is about to be shrunk. After
this, the LVM will actually shrink the volume. Once the volume
has been shrunk, the LVM will notify the features
on the volume that the shrink has been completed. The filesystem
will also be notified that the shrink has been
completed. Once all of this has been completed, then the user
will be notified that the volume has been successfully
shrunk.
The above example is quick and dirty, and it leaves out quite a
bit, but I hope it gives you an idea of what we are
trying to accomplish. Basically, we are trying to bring together
all of the various aspects of logical volume
management into a single, cohesive, seamless entity. Furthermore,
we are trying to do this in a way which is as
flexible and expandable as possible. Consider the following:
The LVMS architecture uses logical disks. Logical disks are
created and controlled by plug-in modules called
"Device Managers". Thus, anything that can be made to appear as a
logical disk through the use of a plug-in
"Device Manager" module can be used by the LVMS. As an example,
lets say we have a "Device Manager" plug-in
which can access a Storage Area Network (SAN). By just adding
this plug-in to an existing system, the LVMS
would be able to allocate storage on a SAN, make it appear as a
logical disk, and then use any of the LVM
capabilities that could be used on a local disk. No code in the
LVMS, existing plug-in modules, or LVM utilities
needs to be modified or changed.
The LVMS Architecture uses logical partitions. Logical partitions
are controlled by plug-in modules called
"Partition Managers". If you wanted to access a drive that was
partitioned for use with a Mac, you would just need
a "Partition Manager" plug-in module that understands the
partitioning scheme used by the Mac. No LVMS,
existing plug-in module, or LVM utility needs to have its code
changed. All that needs to be done is have the Mac
"Partition Manager" plug-in added to the system.
The LVMS Architecture employs something we call "Feature
Plug-ins". Feature Plug-ins control how logical
partitions are combined into logical volumes, such as through
drive linking, the various forms of mirroring, or
software RAID. They can also be used to filter I/O to a volume,
as would be the case for encryption. They can also
be used to redirect I/O, as in the case of bad block relocation.
Furthermore, Feature Plug-ins can be stacked to
produce a volume, so that multiple Feature Plug-ins can be used
on a single volume (encryption combined with
software RAID and bad block relocation, for example). Every
volume in the system can employ different Feature
Plug-ins, and volumes which do use the same Feature Plug-ins can
have them stacked differently. Thus, the user has
an enormous amount of flexibility. One final point to make here
is that, since all of the plug-in modules
communicate with the LVM, the LVM can co-ordinate their
activities to ensure that the user doesn't do something
which will result in the loss of data (at least without adequate
warning).
Given all of the above, I hope everyone understands why we think
the LVMS Architecture we are releasing has
some advantages over other approaches.
Well, this post has gotten excessively long, and I apologize for
that. I will try to address additional
questions/comments/concerns later, hopefully with smaller posts!
Ben Rafanello
IBM Linux Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-06-19 22:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-06-14 21:18 [linux-lvm] IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux Community benr
2000-06-14 23:21 ` Andi Kleen
2000-06-15 6:19 ` [linux-lvm] " Andreas Dilger
2000-06-16 16:45 benr
2000-06-16 23:00 ` Mark Allen
2000-06-19 22:58 benr
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).