From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k8KKkxOG000554 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:46:59 -0400 Received: from mail.volved.com (c-71-192-139-98.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [71.192.139.98]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k8KKkqDc027432 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:46:52 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.volved.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2177C1BA8 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:46:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.volved.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (monolith [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09700-18 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:45:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.0.210] (unknown [192.168.0.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.volved.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A41B1BA7 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:45:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <45119A6B.6090508@volved.com> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:45:47 -0400 From: Barnaby Claydon MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Misleading documentation References: <1158603016.7182.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> <450EEEA0.7020703@mdmiller.com> <1158606792.7182.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1158607438.19905.30.camel@bounty.rider.geekspirit.net> <1158608077.7182.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060918193728.GC28043@arvo.suso.org> <4B875923-CB76-4792-837B-EDA3B9E53756@slamb.org> <20060920032222.GF28043@arvo.suso.org> <1158751643.12030.46.camel@bounty.rider.geekspirit.net> In-Reply-To: <1158751643.12030.46.camel@bounty.rider.geekspirit.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: LVM general discussion and development Fabien Jakimowicz wrote: > On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 03:22 +0000, Mark Krenz wrote: > >> Personally I like it when documentation is kept simple and uses simple >> examples. There is nothing worse than when you are trying to learn >> something and it tells you how to how to intantiate a variable, and then >> it immediately goes on to show you how to make some complicated reference >> to it using some code. >> >> I agree with you though, its probably a good idea to steer newcomers >> in the right direction on disk management and a few notes about doing >> LVM ontop of RAID being a good idea couldn't hurt. This is especially >> so since I've heard three mentions of people using LVM on a server >> without doing RAID this week alone. :-/ >> > We should add something in faq page > ( http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/lvm2faq.html ), like "i've lost one of > my hard drive and i can't mount my lv, did i lost everything ?" followed > by a quick explanation : lvm is NOT faulty tolerant like raid1/5, if you > lose a PV, you lose every LV which was (even partially) on on it. > Not to nit-pick, but when one of my multi-PV LVs experienced a single PV failure, I did NOT lose all the data on the LV. The VG was using linear spanning, so using the --partial parameter with read-only file-system mounting (XFS in my case) I recovered all the data from the LV that wasn't physically spanned onto the failed PV. If this was some sort of miracle and shouldn't have worked, well I suppose I'll count my blessings but it seemed perfectly reasonable at the time. :) -Barnaby