Right, so LVMThin(1) conveniently omits "Oh BTW standard functionality like pvmove() is not implemented."
lvmthin is a sub-set or sub-class of LVM, therefore any reasonable person would assume all functionality cascades down. Because it pretty much does for everything else. > lvm2 has 'no idea' which disk space is in-use for any individual thin LV. > (there are tools like 'thin_ls/thin_rmap' for that) And any reasonable person would assume lvmthin would have implemented the necessary hooks so that pvmove() would work by lvmthin handing lvm back a linked-list of all of the pieces in the correct order so they could be written to lvm(thick) or to another lvmthin pool. This is not that big of a cognitive leap. That Linux LVM thin is missing "obvious" functionality is fine, it just needs to be stated very clearly.
