12:55 p.m.
Hi,
What functionality is expected for anaconda's Device Type LVM Thin Provisioning? Right
now when I choose this device type for, e.g. home, I still can't choose a Desired
Capacity that's larger than free space in the VG. Ergo, I can't create a virtual
size LV. Is this expected? And is the main idea in this roll out just to support the
better faster thinp snapshots? Or am I missing something?
Thanks,
Chris Murphy
1:59 p.m.
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:55:43AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
I still can't choose a Desired Capacity that's larger than
free space
in the VG. Ergo, I can't create a virtual size LV. Is this expected?
At this stage, yes. It might change in future, but I think it was felt
to be both too much code to change and too much change for users to take
on board if it was all changed at once.
Alasdair
6:23 a.m.
On 27.09.2013 20:59, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:55:43AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> I still can't choose a Desired Capacity that's larger than free space
> in the VG. Ergo, I can't create a virtual size LV. Is this expected?
At this stage, yes. It might change in future, but I think it was felt
to be both too much code to change and too much change for users to take
on board if it was all changed at once.
Wouldn't it make sense to use the thinp code by default even without
providing the thin provisioning part in Anaconda? This would at least
give you the much improved snapshot support.
Regards,
Dennis
11:04 a.m.
On Sep 27, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Alasdair G Kergon <agk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:55:43AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> I still can't choose a Desired Capacity that's larger than free space
> in the VG. Ergo, I can't create a virtual size LV. Is this expected?
At this stage, yes. It might change in future, but I think it was felt
to be both too much code to change and too much change for users to take
on board if it was all changed at once.
For an LV to take advantage of thinp snapshots needs to be a virtual size LV drawn from
the thin pool, correct? So it is a virtual size LV in any case, it's just that the
installer isn't going to let users specify total LV virtual sizes greater than the
pool, right?
Chris Murphy
11:34 a.m.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:04:08AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
For an LV to take advantage of thinp snapshots needs to be a virtual
size LV drawn from the thin pool, correct? So it is a virtual size LV
in any case, it's just that the installer isn't going to let users
specify total LV virtual sizes greater than the pool, right?
Yes, that's my undestanding.
Alasdair
1:14 p.m.
On Sep 30, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Alasdair G Kergon <agk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:04:08AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> For an LV to take advantage of thinp snapshots needs to be a virtual
> size LV drawn from the thin pool, correct? So it is a virtual size LV
> in any case, it's just that the installer isn't going to let users
> specify total LV virtual sizes greater than the pool, right?
Yes, that's my undestanding.\
Tried it and checked the anaconda log, and the resulting layout with ssm list. It's as
described. LVs home and root are virtual sized LV's, and swap is a conventional LV.
One problem though is that the resulting system doesn't boot. I'm dropped to a
dracut shell. Filed a bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013767
Chris Murphy
3877
days inactive
3880
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Alasdair G. Kergon -
Chris Murphy -
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn