Brady, thanks for the infos and for the bugzilla link. I made some tests and some some other researches about potential performance penalties of LVM. These seem not to be noticeable especially with recent linux versions. (please see for instance [1]).
Now I'm even more curious about the choice of canonical: there must be a good reason for using such "rough" (pass me the term) filesystem resize technique over a more clean and practical lvm resize. Any thoughts? Cheers, Davide. [1] http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/7122/does-lvm-impact-performance On 08/feb/2013, at 11:53, Pádraig Brady <p...@draigbrady.com> wrote: > On 02/08/2013 08:55 AM, Davide Guerri wrote: >> Hi all, >> I'm preparing some cloud images for the major Linux distributions and I'd >> like they to grow their root fs on boot (to use all the available space). >> >> Ubuntu cloud images (http://cloud-images.ubuntu.com) use initramfs-growroot >> but installing it (and maintaining it across kernel upgrade) could be tricky >> -at least for me- on redhat derived like centos or fedora. > > Note cloud-utils (including growroot) is currently in review for Red Hat > flavored distros: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907756 > >> So my question is: what are pros and cons of using an ext3/4 root-fs and >> initramfs-growroot, or LVM (with a custom script that runs on first boot)? > > LVM might be a bit heavy weight for this? > > cheers, > Pádraig. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
