Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932771AbXECIia (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2007 04:38:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932768AbXECIia (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2007 04:38:30 -0400 Received: from s2.ukfsn.org ([217.158.120.143]:33349 "EHLO mail.ukfsn.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932771AbXECIi2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2007 04:38:28 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1804 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 03 May 2007 04:38:27 EDT Message-ID: <46399876.2030800@dgreaves.com> Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 09:08:22 +0100 From: David Greaves User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070329) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Miguel Sousa Filipe Cc: david@lang.hm, Diego Calleja , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: FEATURE REQUEST: merge MD software raid and LVM in one unique layer. References: <20070502221045.ad20b915.diegocg@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2857 Lines: 87 david@lang.hm wrote: > On Wed, 2 May 2007, Miguel Sousa Filipe wrote: > >> On 5/2/07, Diego Calleja wrote: >>> El Wed, 2 May 2007 20:18:55 +0100, "Miguel Sousa Filipe" >>> escribi?: >>> >>> > I find it high irritanting having two kernel interfaces and two >>> > userland tools that provide the same funcionality, which one should I >>> > use? >>> >>> I doubt users care about kernel's design; however the lack of >>> unification of userspace tools is a real problem. Just my 2?. >> This is also a problem for any developer who tries to improve >> usability in this area by creating some unified userland tools to >> manipulate MD & LVM. (Imagining myself implementing some userland tool >> to create some "storage devices" + mount points.. doesn't seem easy >> nor fun..). > > why do you care if the userspace tool that does the resizing makes > system calls to one layer or to two layers? how would you know? Indeed!! EVMS http://evms.sourceforge.net/ Enterprise Volume Management System In order to make the transition to EVMS as smooth as possible, EVMS includes compatibility with a number of existing storage and volume management systems. Currently, EVMS recognizes: * All locally attached disks * DOS-style disk partitions (used extensively on Linux systems) * GPT disk partitions (mainly used on IA-64) * S/390 disk partitions (CDL/LDL) * BSD disk partitions * Macintosh disk partitions * Linux MD/Software-RAID devices * Linux LVM volume groups and logical volumes (versions 1 and 2) Anything else? Oh... yes: In addition to providing compatibility with these existing systems, EVMS also provides new functionality that can be built on top of any of the above "volumes" that EVMS already recognizes. Features that are currently included are: * Bad Block Relocation * Linear Drive Linking * Generic Snapshotting Enough? or would you like: In addition to these volume-level features, the EVMS tools provide convenient integration with numerous filesystem tools, to allow tasks such as mkfs and fsck directly from the EVMS user interfaces. Currently, the following filesystems are supported: * Ext2/3 * JFS * ReiserFS * XFS * Swap * OCFS2 * NTFS * FAT ?? Oh, and for the l33t there's a GUI and screenshots... Of course, in keeping with ZFS, this management layer is all proprietary and costs megabucks - or is it GPL, can never remember... Damn that "irritanting" architecture - keeps us from doing cool things... Seriously - I hope this is useful ;) David - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/