* metadata 1.2 advantages? @ 2012-02-08 9:01 Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG 2012-02-08 22:16 ` H. Peter Anvin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG @ 2012-02-08 9:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-raid Hi, for now i'm still using grub 0.97 which can only understand metadata 0.9. Are there any advantages of the 1.2 metadata format? Greets, Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: metadata 1.2 advantages? 2012-02-08 9:01 metadata 1.2 advantages? Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG @ 2012-02-08 22:16 ` H. Peter Anvin 2012-02-08 23:59 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2012-02-08 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG; +Cc: linux-raid On 02/08/2012 01:01 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > Hi, > > for now i'm still using grub 0.97 which can only understand metadata > 0.9. Are there any advantages of the 1.2 metadata format? > There are a lot of advantages to the 1.x metadata format, but 1.0 is the easiest for bootloaders to deal with. 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 is the same format, just with the superblock in different places. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: metadata 1.2 advantages? 2012-02-08 22:16 ` H. Peter Anvin @ 2012-02-08 23:59 ` NeilBrown 2012-02-09 0:38 ` H. Peter Anvin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: NeilBrown @ 2012-02-08 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: H. Peter Anvin; +Cc: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG, linux-raid [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 720 bytes --] On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:16:21 -0800 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > On 02/08/2012 01:01 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > > Hi, > > > > for now i'm still using grub 0.97 which can only understand metadata > > 0.9. Are there any advantages of the 1.2 metadata format? > > > > There are a lot of advantages to the 1.x metadata format, but 1.0 is the > easiest for bootloaders to deal with. 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 is the same > format, just with the superblock in different places. Hi Peter, wasn't it you who told be that 1.2 was best for boot loaders, as 1.0 uses block 0 which the bootloader also wants, while 1.2 uses a later block. That is why 1.2 is the default. ?? NeilBrown [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: metadata 1.2 advantages? 2012-02-08 23:59 ` NeilBrown @ 2012-02-09 0:38 ` H. Peter Anvin 2012-02-09 1:02 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2012-02-09 0:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: NeilBrown; +Cc: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG, linux-raid On 02/08/2012 03:59 PM, NeilBrown wrote: > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:16:21 -0800 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> > wrote: > >> On 02/08/2012 01:01 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> for now i'm still using grub 0.97 which can only understand >>> metadata 0.9. Are there any advantages of the 1.2 metadata >>> format? >>> >> >> There are a lot of advantages to the 1.x metadata format, but 1.0 >> is the easiest for bootloaders to deal with. 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 is >> the same format, just with the superblock in different places. > > Hi Peter, wasn't it you who told be that 1.2 was best for boot > loaders, as 1.0 uses block 0 which the bootloader also wants, while > 1.2 uses a later block. That is why 1.2 is the default. > No, 1.1 uses block 0 which the bootloader wants. Bootloaders need no special enabling to support 0.9 or 1.0 RAID-1. 1.2 requires special enabling, but is workable. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: metadata 1.2 advantages? 2012-02-09 0:38 ` H. Peter Anvin @ 2012-02-09 1:02 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: NeilBrown @ 2012-02-09 1:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: H. Peter Anvin; +Cc: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG, linux-raid [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1282 bytes --] On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:38:08 -0800 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > On 02/08/2012 03:59 PM, NeilBrown wrote: > > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:16:21 -0800 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> > > wrote: > > > >> On 02/08/2012 01:01 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> for now i'm still using grub 0.97 which can only understand > >>> metadata 0.9. Are there any advantages of the 1.2 metadata > >>> format? > >>> > >> > >> There are a lot of advantages to the 1.x metadata format, but 1.0 > >> is the easiest for bootloaders to deal with. 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 is > >> the same format, just with the superblock in different places. > > > > Hi Peter, wasn't it you who told be that 1.2 was best for boot > > loaders, as 1.0 uses block 0 which the bootloader also wants, while > > 1.2 uses a later block. That is why 1.2 is the default. > > > > No, 1.1 uses block 0 which the bootloader wants. > > Bootloaders need no special enabling to support 0.9 or 1.0 RAID-1. > 1.2 requires special enabling, but is workable. Doh - of course. Wasn't thinking straight. So 1.0 is good for boot loaders 1.1 is bad for boot loaders 1.2 is OK for boot loaders and good for other reasons (resizeable devices). Thanks, NeilBrown [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-02-09 1:02 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2012-02-08 9:01 metadata 1.2 advantages? Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG 2012-02-08 22:16 ` H. Peter Anvin 2012-02-08 23:59 ` NeilBrown 2012-02-09 0:38 ` H. Peter Anvin 2012-02-09 1:02 ` NeilBrown
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).