Subject: Re: wedges vs. not-quite-wedges, was > 1T filesystems, disklabels, etc
To: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@netbsd.org>
From: Nathan J. Williams <nathanw@wasabisystems.com>
List: tech-kern
Date: 12/19/2002 19:32:57
Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@netbsd.org> writes:

> Among other things, the only logical volumes we could express (say from
> reading an IBM/OSF/HPUX volume group) in terms of wedges are very simple
> ones; ones where there is no striping or mirroring going on, and where the
> whole LV was allocated in terms of one extent. Anything more sophisticated
> than that won't be expressable via wedges.
>
> While I think the kernel might need something like wedges in an LVM
> subsystem, I don't see why we need to expose it to userland.

Okay, sure. LVMs are harder. That still doesn't address your claim
that it would be nice to adopt someone else's LVM layout or metadata.

        - Nathan