From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heinz Mauelshagen Subject: Re: [PATCH 000 of 5] md: Introduction Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:54:28 +0100 Message-ID: <20060123135428.GA2801@redhat.com> References: <43D02033.4070008@cfl.rr.com> <17360.9233.215291.380922@cse.unsw.edu.au> <20060120183621.GA2799@redhat.com> <20060120225724.GW22163@marowsky-bree.de> <20060121000142.GR2801@redhat.com> <20060121000344.GY22163@marowsky-bree.de> <20060121000806.GT2801@redhat.com> <20060121001311.GA22163@marowsky-bree.de> <20060123094418.GX2801@redhat.com> <20060123125420.GE1686@vianova.fi> Reply-To: mauelshagen@redhat.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060123125420.GE1686@vianova.fi> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ville Herva Cc: Heinz Mauelshagen , Lars Marowsky-Bree , Neil Brown , Phillip Susi , Jan Engelhardt , "Lincoln Dale (ltd)" , Michael Tokarev , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Steinar H. Gunderson" List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 02:54:20PM +0200, Ville Herva wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 10:44:18AM +0100, you [Heinz Mauelshagen] wrote: > > > > > > I use the regularly to play with md and other stuff... > > > > Me too but for production, I want to avoid the > > additional stacking overhead and complexity. > > > > > So I remain unconvinced that code duplication is worth it for more than > > > "hark we want it so!" ;-) > > > > Shall I remove you from the list of potential testers of dm-raid45 then ;-) > > Heinz, > > If you really want the rest of us to convert from md to lvm, you should > perhaps give some attention to thee brittle userland (scripts and and > binaries). Sure :-) > > It is very tedious to have to debug a production system for a few hours in > order to get the rootfs mounted after each kernel update. > > The lvm error messages give almost no clue on the problem. > > Worse yet, problem reports on these issues are completely ignored on the lvm > mailing list, even when a patch is attached. > > (See > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-lvm&m=113775502821403&w=2 > http://linux.msede.com/lvm_mlist/archive/2001/06/0205.html > http://linux.msede.com/lvm_mlist/archive/2001/06/0271.html > for reference.) Hrm, those are initscripts related, not lvm directly > > Such experience gives an impression lvm is not yet ready for serious > production use. initscripts/initramfs surely need to do the right thing in case root is on lvm. > > No offense intended, lvm kernel (lvm1 nor lvm2) code has never given me > trouble, and is probably as solid as anything. Alright. Is the initscript issue fixed now or still open ? Had you filed a bug against the distros initscripts ? > > > -- v -- > > v@iki.fi > > PS: Speaking of debugging failing initrd init scripts; it would be nice if > the kernel gave an error message on wrong initrd format rather than silently > failing... Yes, I forgot to make the cpio with the "-H newc" option :-/. -- Regards, Heinz -- The LVM Guy -- *** Software bugs are stupid. Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them *** =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Heinz Mauelshagen Red Hat GmbH Consulting Development Engineer Am Sonnenhang 11 Cluster and Storage Development 56242 Marienrachdorf Germany Mauelshagen@RedHat.com +49 2626 141200 FAX 924446 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-