Galevsky wrote: > On Dec 20, 2007 10:31 PM, Mick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Unlike commonly perceived wisdom I don't think that LVM is a panacea for all >> ills, or a necessity as such. It is however bloody convenient, especially on >> a growing fs. A server that is not expected to change much in size, probably >> does not need it. On the other hand some servers (file, mail, news servers) >> are bound to continue to accumulate data and their fs will increase in time. >> I would argue that the former type of server can happily live in a few >> primary >> partitions + 1 extended with a number of logical partitions, if you are going >> for a multi-partitioned scheme, while the latter type of server will greatly >> benefit from LVM. Of course, if hard drive redundancy is necessary, then I >> can't see how you could live without LVM + RAID. > I understand you on "LVM is not a must for very stable servers", but > since I can't see any good reason not to use LVM, I see no reason to > limit your abilities to extended partitions. We have the opportunity > to be more flexible with LVM, why should we not get it ? To loose the > ability to extend a partition by adding a new HD without any pain ? I > mean, if you don't know how to use it, I understand that you may skip > installing a LVM system, but when you did it once, I see no reason to > install your new systems without. So, I am interested in your advice > about LVM is not the universal solution for partitions management, > since I am sure I have something to learn from you experience.
Agreed. As I said in another e-mail on the list, I use to use extended partitions - at one point I had about 10 or so partitions on a single drive (3 primary, the rest from an extended partition). This worked well under Windows 9x, but was a pain after moving to Linux. It wasn't that I had mis-scoped the size of the data for those partitions, just that my needs changed (mainly user related needs, not system related needs), and managing extended partitions is a lot of work. I very much understand LVM and what would do for me, and would very much like to hear why simple extended partitions would be better for any scenario but the most limited of scenarios where LVM was just not possible (e.g. the system could not run a kernel that supported LVM; or RAM on the system was too limited to support running LVM; etc.)...I'm not sure I agree that they would be. Ben -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
