NetBSD-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Beating a dead horse

On 11/25/15 14:26, Swift Griggs wrote:
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.


While LVM may have been designed by committee, I am pretty sure it was originally an SGI committee, & seems pretty good to me as well. All of my old SGI stuff worked like clockwork as long as it functioned (snif ....).


	William A. Mahaffey III


	"The M1 Garand is without doubt the finest implement of war
	 ever devised by man."
                           -- Gen. George S. Patton Jr.

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index