From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christophe Varoqui Subject: Re: creating partition mappings with different delimiters Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 19:49:49 +0200 Message-ID: <4432B1BD.3080709@free.fr> References: <1144081162.3111.32.camel@gator.sc.steeleye.com> <1144097506.3111.81.camel@gator.sc.steeleye.com> <44319246.6040008@free.fr> <20060404132417.GH5783@vienna.egenera.com> <1144157784.3111.60.camel@gator.sc.steeleye.com> <20060404144612.GJ5783@vienna.egenera.com> Reply-To: device-mapper development Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060404144612.GJ5783@vienna.egenera.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com To: device-mapper development List-Id: dm-devel.ids >> It seems to me that volume managers, aka LVM or the like, is where folks >> should be heading and the faster we can move them in that direction the >> better. The volume managers provide so much more flexibility than >> partitions. >> >> > > Maybe so. But they also add another layer of complexity for > booting. I'd like the steps between me and a successful boot > to be as complex as required but no more so. > > True, just as the whole SAN is just another layer layer of complexity for booting and swaping : zoning and selective storage presentation errors are common, not to mention software shortcomings. System on SAN is just a bit more risky. Not doing it also cuts down on the main use for partitions. Big data volumes can be handled just fine by storage arrays internal volume managers. My opinions, anyway. So subject to frequent oscillations ;) Regards, cvaroqui