From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932447AbWAWK0u (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:26:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932444AbWAWK0u (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:26:50 -0500 Received: from gate.in-addr.de ([212.8.193.158]:16518 "EHLO mx.in-addr.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932443AbWAWK0t (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:26:49 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:26:01 +0100 From: Lars Marowsky-Bree To: Heinz Mauelshagen Cc: Neil Brown , Phillip Susi , Jan Engelhardt , "Lincoln Dale (ltd)" , Michael Tokarev , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Steinar H. Gunderson" Subject: Re: [PATCH 000 of 5] md: Introduction Message-ID: <20060123102601.GD2366@marowsky-bree.de> References: <17360.5011.975665.371008@cse.unsw.edu.au> <43D02033.4070008@cfl.rr.com> <17360.9233.215291.380922@cse.unsw.edu.au> <20060120183621.GA2799@redhat.com> <20060120225724.GW22163@marowsky-bree.de> <20060121000142.GR2801@redhat.com> <20060121000344.GY22163@marowsky-bree.de> <20060121000806.GT2801@redhat.com> <20060121001311.GA22163@marowsky-bree.de> <20060123094418.GX2801@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20060123094418.GX2801@redhat.com> X-Ctuhulu: HASTUR User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2006-01-23T10:44:18, Heinz Mauelshagen wrote: > > Besides, stacking between dm devices so far (ie, if I look how kpartx > > does it, or LVM2 on top of MPIO etc, which works just fine) is via the > > block device layer anyway - and nothing stops you from putting md on top > > of LVM2 LVs either. > > > > I use the regularly to play with md and other stuff... > > Me too but for production, I want to avoid the > additional stacking overhead and complexity. Ok, I still didn't get that. I must be slow. Did you implement some DM-internal stacking now to avoid the above mentioned complexity? Otherwise, even DM-on-DM is still stacked via the block device abstraction... Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée -- High Availability & Clustering SUSE Labs, Research and Development SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"