Christopher Chan wrote: > Morten Torstensen wrote: >> On 08.12.2009 13:34, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote: >>>> Speaking for me (on Linux systems) on top of LVM on top of md. On IRIX >>>> as it was intended. >>>> >>> That is a disaster combination for XFS even now. You mentioned some >>> pretty hefty hardware in your other post... >> If XFS doesn't play well with LVM, how can it even be an option? I >> couldn't live without LVM... >> > > I meant it in the sense of data guarantee. XFS has a major history of > losing data unless used with hardware raid cards that have a bbu cache. > That changed when XFS got barrier support. > > However, anything on LVM be it ext3, ext4 or XFS that has barrier > support will not be able to use barriers because device-mapper does not > support barriers and therefore, if you use LVM, it better be on a > hardware raid array where the card has bbu cache. Wait, just to be clear, are you saying that all use of LVM is a bad idea unless on hardware RAID? That's bad it if it's true since it seems to me that most modern distros like to use LVM by default. Am I missing something? -- Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window. - Steve Wozniak