On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > Alan McKinnon wrote: >> >> On Saturday 26 March 2011 15:06:31 Elaine C. Sharpe wrote: >> >>>> >>>> Just because something works for most people, doesn't mean it will for >>>> everyone either. If you lose data, it doesn't matter. LVM just adds >>>> one more layer of something to go wrong. Me, I don't need the extra >>>> risk of having a system that doesn't boot and a loss of data. I'm sure >>>> there are a lot of people that see it the way I do too. They just >>>> don't >>>> need the extra risk. >>>> >>> >>> Using the least number of layers of abstraction you can get away with is >>> a perfectly valid criteria. What I was pointing out was that informal >>> polls of users with a sad story to tell is not a very effective way to >>> conduct research. People say all kinds of things that just aren't true. >>> >> >> There's an elephant in this room. The number of actual layers is greater >> than >> just LVM plus FS. It's whatever the BIOS (or a reasonable substitute is >> doing), plus the drive firmware, kernel driver(s) - there's more than one >> of >> those - plus any RAID in use (hardware or software) and finally the file >> system. >> >> That's a lot of layers, a lot of code, a lot of opportunity for people to >> reveal the extent of their lack of knowledge. I've often heard it said >> that >> code like ZFS and brtfs eliminates several of these layers therefore it's >> technically a better option. That may be true, but let me just point out >> that >> whatever LVM+fs+other_stuff is doing as separate chunks of code also gets >> done >> by ZFS etc. You just don't see it, and just because it's abstracted away >> doesn't mean it's not there. >> >> > > I'll add this. Alan if I recall correctly runs a lot of systems. He has a > boatload of experience using all sorts of software/hardware. Me, I don't. > For the longest, I had one system and that was it. If I upgrade my kernel, > LVM, or some package that LVM depends on and I can't boot, I'm screwed. If > I can't boot, I can't google anything to find out how to fix it. I also > don't know enough about LVM to fix it myself. Since there is so many layers > of things that can already go wrong on a system, adding one more layer that > can be complicated only makes a problem grow. > > I'm sure Alan and many others could go out and buy or build a new system and > put LVM on it and fix about any problem that comes along. Thing is, there > are others that can't. Add to this that when I was thinking about using it, > I read where a lot of people, for whatever reason, couldn't get it back > working again and lost data. For me, I don't care if it was LVM itself, the > kernel or some combination of other things, if I can't boot or lose data, > the result is the same. I can fix a kernel problem, a broken package but if > LVM fails, I'm stuck. > > That said, I now have a second rig. I may at some point use LVM because I > can always go to the other room and use my old rig to get help. I already > have a 750Gb drive that is about full of pictures, I got a camera and get a > little happy at times, and videos I have downloaded, everything from TV > series to stuff off youtube. I may buy another large drive and use LVM or > something to give me more room since I really don't want to have to break up > my filing system across two separate drives. I won't consider putting the > booting part of my OS on LVM tho. > > Of course, I did see a 3Tb drive on sale the other day at newegg. o_O That > would last a while. ;-) > > Dale > > :-) :-)
Dale, I understand your position and concerns. While I have a number of systems, I have little time or patience for dealing with a lot of this stuff and LVM has been one of them. One thing I'm considering to try out LVM is a second Gentoo installation on an already running system. It will either be a 50GB partition of its own, or a Virtualbox VM. I'd do the normal Gentoo install for LVM, figure out how it works, etc., and then decide if I want to use it in the future. After all, as Neil said, if something offers features we don't feel we need then why buy it? - Mark
