From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 19 May 2001 21:03:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 19 May 2001 21:03:20 -0400 Received: from panic.ohr.gatech.edu ([130.207.47.194]:5549 "HELO havoc.gtf.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sat, 19 May 2001 21:03:16 -0400 Message-ID: <3B0717CE.57613D4A@mandrakesoft.com> Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 21:03:10 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik Organization: MandrakeSoft X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.5-pre3 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Alexander Viro , Edgar Toernig , Ben LaHaise , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Why side-effects on open(2) are evil. (was Re: [RFD w/info-PATCH]device arguments from lookup) In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Here's a dumb question, and I apologize if I am questioning computer science dogma... Why are LVM and EVMS(competing LVM project) needed at all? Surely the same can be accomplished with * md * snapshot blkdev (attached in previous e-mail) * giving partitions and blkdevs the ability to grow and shrink * giving filesystems the ability to grow and shrink On-line optimization (defrag, etc) shouldn't be hard once you have the ability to move blocks and files around, which would come with the ability to grow and shrink blkdevs and fs's. -- Jeff Garzik | "Do you have to make light of everything?!" Building 1024 | "I'm extremely serious about nailing your MandrakeSoft | step-daughter, but other than that, yes."