From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.110.5]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n9TNjnFp020519 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:45:49 -0400 Received: from mail-qy0-f185.google.com (mail-qy0-f185.google.com [209.85.221.185]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n9TNjdO3008989 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:45:39 -0400 Received: by qyk15 with SMTP id 15so1376687qyk.23 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:45:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:45:39 +0100 Message-ID: <868096450910291645k49ebb1dfn1e55e5132805011e@mail.gmail.com> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Abraham_P=E9rez?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175770ea395eb604771b8241 Subject: [linux-lvm] Best Practices deploying LVM 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: To: LVM general discussion and development --0015175770ea395eb604771b8241 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi everyone, I'm looking for some whitepapper or similar document to find any kind of best practices using LVM. For example, usually i make only one volume group in each server and inside it I create different logical volumes for different purposes, but talking with one colleague, we discover that he makes one volume group for each logical volume (more or less)... so my final question is: in performance terms, what configuration is more efficient and why? Please excuse my writen english, but I don't use it very often. Thanks for your attention, Abraham P=E9rez --0015175770ea395eb604771b8241 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi everyone,

I'm looking for some whitepapper or similar documen= t to find any kind of best practices using LVM.

For example, usually= i make only one volume group in each server and inside it I create differe= nt logical volumes for different purposes, but talking with one colleague, = we discover that he makes one volume group for each logical volume (more or= less)... so my final question is: in performance terms, what configuration= is more efficient and why?

Please excuse my writen english, but I don't use it very often.
=
Thanks for your attention,
Abraham P=E9rez
--0015175770ea395eb604771b8241--