Re: The case against LVM

On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 11:03:26AM -0400, Michael H. Semcheski wrote:
On 7/31/07, Timothy Murphy <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
However, I've decided that it causes unnecessary complications,
as some applications do not seem to accept the LVM devices,
while I don't find any real advantages to compensate.

I think it definitely can make rescues and recovery more difficult.
But, not impossible.

Agreed. You need a rescue/recovery disk that supports LVM, like
finnix. I had lots of fun adding LVM support to my script. LVM is not
documented at the level I needed, so it was a lot of reading the code,
reverse engineering, and "by guess and by golly!".

http://www.charlescurley.com/Linux-Complete-Backup-and-Recovery-HOWTO.html


--

Charles Curley /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
Looking for fine software \ / Respect for open standards
and/or writing? X No HTML/RTF in email
http://www.charlescurley.com / \ No M$ Word docs in email

Key fingerprint = CE5C 6645 A45A 64E4 94C0 809C FFF6 4C48 4ECD DFDB

Attachment: pgpAYwVZEaXJZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list