On Monday 08 October 2007, Alexander Skwar wrote: > Alan McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Extra benefits of LVM: You won't need this right now for your > > simple desktop with one drive, but it's good to know what else LVM > > can do: > > > > Snapshots. > > Well, I "disagree". This feature is also very useful on a > single drive setup. Reason why: Backup. You can easily create > snapshot(s) and then backup those snapshot volumes. And at > the same time, you can keep on working on the normal filesystems.
Yes, that's the general process I was referring to. Snapshots are used much less often for backups on desktops (but still useful!) than on servers. I had assumed that the original poster wasn't going to be using snapshots on his desktop anytime soon. > > This is a lifesaver if your job is to perform backups of 4TB > > databases that can never be taken down for backups. > > IMO it's also good for smaller setups. > > For huge setups, it's sort of a must, exactly as you wrote. > > > If you need any more convincing, IBM mainframes and HP machines > > running HP-UX have required you to use LVM for years now - you > > can't get to the disks without using LVM. > > Not true. With HP-UX 11.11, you could also choose *NOT* to use LVM. Ah, OK, thanks for that. My info came from a long-time HP sysadmin when we were comparing notes between HP-UX and Linux. He might have generalised a lot though. This question of "Is LVM a good idea?" keeps cropping up on mailing lists. I find this a bit strange as I find huge benefits and have yet to find a valid downside for general use. Embedded systems would be an exception I suppose but they generally don't need any flexibility at all on their volumes. alan -- Optimists say the glass is half full, Pessimists say the glass is half empty, Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
