From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751398AbWAWMyZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:54:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751438AbWAWMyZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:54:25 -0500 Received: from herkules.vianova.fi ([194.100.28.129]:41621 "HELO mail.vianova.fi") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751437AbWAWMyY (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:54:24 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:54:20 +0200 From: Ville Herva To: Heinz Mauelshagen Cc: Lars Marowsky-Bree , 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: <20060123125420.GE1686@vianova.fi> Reply-To: vherva@vianova.fi 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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060123094418.GX2801@redhat.com> X-Operating-System: Linux herkules.vianova.fi 2.4.32-rc1 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 10:44:18AM +0100, you [Heinz Mauelshagen] wrote: > > > > 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. > > > So I remain unconvinced that code duplication is worth it for more than > > "hark we want it so!" ;-) > > Shall I remove you from the list of potential testers of dm-raid45 then ;-) Heinz, If you really want the rest of us to convert from md to lvm, you should perhaps give some attention to thee brittle userland (scripts and and binaries). It is very tedious to have to debug a production system for a few hours in order to get the rootfs mounted after each kernel update. The lvm error messages give almost no clue on the problem. Worse yet, problem reports on these issues are completely ignored on the lvm mailing list, even when a patch is attached. (See http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-lvm&m=113775502821403&w=2 http://linux.msede.com/lvm_mlist/archive/2001/06/0205.html http://linux.msede.com/lvm_mlist/archive/2001/06/0271.html for reference.) Such experience gives an impression lvm is not yet ready for serious production use. No offense intended, lvm kernel (lvm1 nor lvm2) code has never given me trouble, and is probably as solid as anything. -- v -- v@iki.fi PS: Speaking of debugging failing initrd init scripts; it would be nice if the kernel gave an error message on wrong initrd format rather than silently failing... Yes, I forgot to make the cpio with the "-H newc" option :-/.