[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-users] domU -->Failure: failed to start /dev/md1

  • To: Andy Smith <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 07:38:37 +0100
  • Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 23:38:40 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=JQoVWpWF8+MneZMm6jp591sW7/X3Ys/vFCDWOM6eDvoxvfPrWQrJ8x2k4BeYTbz4LJSAe9BizwcAi2+ihlmvOmja3QzbgOCklvjY3h3GBc4/Q2jmcsy0Qt+CUCDKw0EQmp4LJ5rVfV3RYT+/+/aRy6/PueumhAc6mXmBdL/sGgM=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

Andy Smith wrote:

On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 09:51:38PM +0100, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
Is there *ANY* reason to do software RAID, LVM, or other filesystem cuteness in a DomU? Except maybe for configuration testing purposes? Let the Dom0 do the work, I'm quite certain it will be more efficient about it.

I generally agree, although I have some customers who want to manage
their own filesystems with LVM, so for them I give them one block
device with / on and another with nothing on for them to use as an
LVM PV as they please.  So that ends up as LVM on LVM on RAID.  I'm
sure there's a performance hit but haven't benchmarked exactly how

It also has the advantage that when they want more disk space I can
attach another block device and they can add this to their VG
without having to reboot their domU.
Hmm. OK, avoiding rebooting is useful. I've just found running LVM inside of LVM to be very awkward to gain access to the file systems form Dom0, and make snapshotting the DomU filesystem for off-line backup to be even riskier.

Xen-users mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.