From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Russell Coker Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] badblocks handling with LVM Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 19:59:48 +0200 References: <200104231008.f3NA8Gkx001134@webber.adilger.int> In-Reply-To: <200104231008.f3NA8Gkx001134@webber.adilger.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01042519594802.31687@lyta> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: linux-lvm@sistina.com, Andreas Dilger On Monday 23 April 2001 12:08, Andreas Dilger wrote: > Laurent writes: > > I have blocks marked bad on a ext2 filesystem. The device has bad > > blocks. I'm wondering how bad blocks are handled with lvm. I would l= ike > > to create a phycal volume on this device and use reiserfs on it. > > Could you give me some informations ? > > As long as the bad blocks are not in the first ~250kB of the partition/= disk > then LVM doesn't care about it. However, reiserfs doesn't yet support = bad > blocks in the filesystem (this is currently under development AFAIK), s= o > this will not help you. The problem is that when you move LV's around and make snapshots the bad=20 blocks on the underlieing media will move. Therefore I think that manage= ment=20 of bad blocks possibly should be done in the LVM. Or should we just assume that LVM runs over RAID arrays of ATA/SCSI disks= =20 that have sector-sparing so that bad blocks are not an issue? --=20 http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page