Re: Beating a dead horse

[Swift Griggs <swiftgriggs%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015, Robert Elz wrote:
> FFS is OK on NetBSD-7 (not sure about LFS or others, never tried them). 
> Raidframe might be (haven't looked) but both cgd and ccd are a mess...

I wonder if the same is true for LVM? Since it's relatively new, perhaps 
some of these issues were worked out in a more "modern" way that would 
properly take advantage of the NetBSD-7 kernel.

Personally, as a long-time sysadmin, having LVM fully implemented is a 
huge plus (especially when it fully integrates RAID features without 
another abstraction layer to deal with). I know that RAIDFrame is capable 
and I've used it myself, but I see LVM as being one of the (very) few 
design-by-committee projects that ever amounted to squat. Perhaps they 
should have involved ISO or IEEE to properly ruin it. Nonetheless, 
irrespective of my warm fuzzy coming from familiarity or actual design 
wisdom, LVM makes a lot of sense to me, if for no other reason than I get 
to shorten the mental-linked-list of block storage management tools like 
RAIDFrame, GEOM, VxVM, XVM, LVM, SVM, ZFS, BTRFS, AdvFS, LSM, etc.... 
Being a support engineer for many multiple flavors of Unix ... I get 
around.


-Swift