From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 09:46:45 +0100 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] What is a good stripe size? Message-ID: <20010621094645.A300@gambit> References: <134718885.992837796416.JavaMail.root@boots> <20010618123318.A31606@tiger.bigcats.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010618123318.A31606@tiger.bigcats.invalid>; from weissel@netcologne.de on Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:33:18PM +0200 From: Joe Thornber 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" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-lvm@sistina.com On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:33:18PM +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote: ... > First, we need a fool^Wcrashproof, completely interruptible > pvmove for active, being currently read from and written > to LVs. I hope this is already there. Do your experiences suggest it isn't working for active pv's ? > Once this is there, we need to have a pvmove which > can be told the physical place to move to, else we can only > spread the most accessed PEs over the PVs. This is exactly what we're planning for the next version of LVM. The moving of extents will be performed by the kernel rather than in user space, the ioctl interface will allow the user to specify a list of pe movements. > Then the rest is simply ripping a balancing algorithm from > somewhere and slap it into a wrapper. Data aquisition is > already done via lvmsadc/lvmsar. Yes, a little Perl script to process the usage stats and then create a new map. - Joe