On 02/10/2013 02:38 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 10 February 2013 03:27, Davide Guerri <davide.gue...@gmail.com> wrote:
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.
LVM is strictly more complexity: you still have to resize the block
device, and resize the filesystem metadata on top of it.
More complex but more flexible in when/how the resize of the device is done.
Whether that flexibility is needed is another question,
but I suppose supporting LVM would support more standard
cloud images where LVM is enabled by default.
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
