On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 12:08:12 +0000 Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 12:48:13 +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote: > > > > I'm using metadata version 1.2 for the raid0 array and the type is > > > kernel based autodetect. > > > > Ouch, auto-detect does not work with metadata 1.2. > > Please read the man-page section: > > > > Please rebuild the raid-device using v0.90 metadata and try again. > > I don't understand why your using RAID at all. LVM on top of RAID0 > makes no sense to me when you can simply make each device a PV and > add it to the VG. That's more flexible and easier to repair. > > Some folks like to do the striping in RAID, it's more controllable. 1st block on this disk, 2nd block on that disk, 3rd block on first disk again... Pooling LVM PVs into a VG is a huge gigantic basket of stuff where you don't really get to control very much - LVM sticks data wherever it wants to and you do little more than give some gentle hints (which I strongly suspect are mostly ignored) But yes, in the usual case RAID-0 on LVM doesn't make much sense for most folks. Personally, I prefer ZFS. This whole huge list of shit just goes away: disk partitions partition types disk labels worrying about if my block size is right worrying if my boundaries are correct PVs as different from VGs and LVs VGs as different from PVs and LVs LVs as different from PVs and VGs lvextend && growfs to make stuff bigger umount && shrinkfs && lvreduce && growfs && mount to make stuff smaller I can now take a much simpler view of things: "I have these disks, use 'em. When I've figured out the actual quotas and sizes I need, I'll let you know. Meanwhile just get on with it and store my stuff in some reasonable fashion, 'mkay? kthankxbye! I have real work to do." :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
