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 (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id iBLHBZr06653 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:11:35 -0500 Received: from smtpout03-04.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpout03-04.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.165.74]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id iBLHBTrN013539 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:11:29 -0500 Message-ID: <41C85936.9030802@starnetworks.us> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:11:18 -0700 From: "Kevin P. Fleming" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] lvm/fs issue References: <0B834CEE3453504B82AB821DFB7047C1FF01B6@enyc11p32003.corpny.csfb.com> In-Reply-To: <0B834CEE3453504B82AB821DFB7047C1FF01B6@enyc11p32003.corpny.csfb.com> 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 Rosenstrauch, David wrote: > Although I currently have only 1 logical volume, and all my PV's are currently > a part of it, that's not necessarily how things will always be. I > intentionally partitioned most of my disk into ~2GB chunks like this, so that > I can have a pool of 2GB PV's which I can throw at whichever LV needs it, and > thereby rid myself of future space constraint issues I've run into in the past > with traditional partitioning. But that's the whole point of LVM in the first place! If you make a single PV, with a VG including it, you can carve it up and re-carve it up however you like, for whatever LVs you have or create in the future. You can even _shrink_ LVs and make the space available to other LVs, which you cannot do with partitions.