From: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
To: Kevin Corry <corryk@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Steven Dake <sdake@mvista.com>,
Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC - new raid superblock layout for md driver
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:55:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021121215509.GJ14063@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <02112114532304.06518@boiler>
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 02:53:23PM -0600, Kevin Corry wrote:
>
> LVM doesn't handle the filesystem resizing, the filesystem tools do. The only
> thing you need is something in user-space to ensure the correct ordering. For
> an expand, the MD device must be expanded first. When that is complete,
> resizefs is called to expand the filesystem.
>
> MD currently doesn't allow resize of RAID 0, 4 or 5, because expanding
> striped devices is way ugly.
MD doesn't, raidreconf does but not online.
> If it was determined to be possible, the MD
> driver may need additional support to allow online resize.
Yes, it would. It's not impossible, just difficult.
> But it is just as
> easy to add this support to MD rather than have to merge MD and DM.
Well, merging the two would actually be rather a simple task I think since
you would still keep each md mode a separate module, the only difference
might be some inter-communication call backs between LVM and MD, but even
those aren't necessarily required. The prime benefit I would see from
making the two into one is being able to integrate all the disparate
superblocks into a single superblock format that helps to avoid any
possible startup errors between the different logical mapping levels.
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com> 919-754-3700 x44233
Red Hat, Inc.
1801 Varsity Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27606
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-21 21:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-20 4:09 RFC - new raid superblock layout for md driver Neil Brown
2002-11-20 10:03 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-11-20 10:03 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-11-20 23:02 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-22 0:08 ` Kenneth D. Merry
2002-12-09 3:52 ` Neil Brown
2002-12-09 23:50 ` large await discrepancies Joe Pruett
2002-12-10 15:59 ` Joe Pruett
2002-12-12 15:30 ` Joe Pruett
2002-12-10 6:28 ` RFC - new raid superblock layout for md driver Kenneth D. Merry
2002-12-11 0:07 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-20 13:58 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2002-11-20 23:17 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-20 14:09 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-20 23:11 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-21 0:30 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-21 0:30 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-21 0:10 ` John Adams
2002-11-21 0:30 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-21 0:30 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-20 16:03 ` Joel Becker
2002-11-20 23:31 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-21 1:46 ` Doug Ledford
2002-11-21 19:34 ` Joel Becker
2002-11-21 19:54 ` Doug Ledford
2002-11-21 19:57 ` Steven Dake
2002-11-21 20:38 ` Doug Ledford
2002-11-21 20:49 ` Steven Dake
2002-11-21 20:35 ` Kevin Corry
2002-11-21 21:29 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-21 21:22 ` Doug Ledford
2002-11-21 20:53 ` Kevin Corry
2002-11-21 21:55 ` Doug Ledford [this message]
2002-11-21 23:49 ` DM vs MD (Was: RFC - new raid superblock layout for md driver) Luca Berra
2002-11-21 20:06 ` RFC - new raid superblock layout for md driver Joel Becker
2002-11-21 23:35 ` Luca Berra
2002-11-22 10:13 ` Joe Thornber
2002-12-02 21:38 ` Neil Brown
2002-12-03 8:24 ` Luca Berra
2002-11-20 17:05 ` Steven Dake
2002-11-20 23:30 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-11-20 23:48 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-21 0:29 ` Steven Dake
2002-11-21 15:23 ` John Stoffel
2002-11-21 19:36 ` Joel Becker
2002-11-22 7:11 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-11-20 15:55 Steve Pratt
2002-11-20 23:24 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-20 23:47 Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-11-21 0:31 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-21 0:35 ` Steven Dake
2002-11-21 0:35 ` Steven Dake
2002-11-21 1:10 ` Alan Cox
2002-12-08 22:35 ` Neil Brown
2002-11-21 19:39 ` Joel Becker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20021121215509.GJ14063@redhat.com \
--to=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=Joel.Becker@oracle.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=corryk@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au \
--cc=sdake@mvista.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.