Tracy R Reed wrote: > James G. Sack (jim) wrote: >> Perhaps I should have used virtualization instead of indirection, and >> it's all handwaving, of course, but I was thinking that removing a layer >> could improve performance, mainly latency, I suppose. And not less >> important, I was thinking that there might be simplification leading to >> better maintainability and fewer places for bugs to hide. > > So far I have never seen a measure of latency induced by LVM or heard > any concerns that it is a performance bottleneck. Given that a few > pointer redirects in the block layer are FAR faster than the latency > imposed by the disk itself not too many people are concerned with LVM > performance yet.
You're surely right. It may involve some lookup cost as well, but those costs are no doubt insignificant compared to hardware responses. Regards ..jim (withdraw one strawman) -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
