Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 01:52:15 +0100 From: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> To: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= ) Cc: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Future of RAIDFrame Message-ID: <p06002056bc263e5de484@[10.0.1.4]> In-Reply-To: <xzpk73zs7sq.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <40007D14.6090205@freebsd.org> <xzpk73zs7sq.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 12:28 AM +0100 2004/01/11, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> I'm having trouble seeing what RF does that Vinum (or at least a
> properly GEOMified Vinum) can't do...
I think Scott is right, in that we should probably have separate
RAID vs. LVM systems. It seems to me that vinum naturally fills the
LVM role, while RAIDframe handles the RAID side well.
--
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06002056bc263e5de484>