On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 09:20:55AM -0500, Dave Wysochanski wrote: > On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 15:23 +0000, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 03:28:20PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 02:30, Dave Wysochanski <dwyso...@redhat.com> > > > wrote: > > > > Note that by scanning a single PV we may not be able to answer > > > > definitively what VG it is in or what LVs it may contain. So provided > > > > we go this route with putting into the udev database all needed > > > > information that today you get from pv/vg/lvdisplay commands, something > > > > else will have to put together individual PV information to get an > > > > accurate picture of the VG / LV info in the system. > > When we discussed this with David in Boston, it became clear that the > > udev database as currently implemented was unable to hold the information > > LVM2 needs to store. > What are the specific limitations of the udev database that make it > unsuitable for LVM? - Inability to store entities not directly related to known devices - Placeholders for PVs with known UUIDs but where the major/minor is not yet known - Volume Group information that links PVs together but will never be itself a device - Difficulty of indexing by multiple keys to access the above info
Alasdair -- a...@redhat.com _______________________________________________ devkit-devel mailing list devkit-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/devkit-devel
