[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FCD5BF3.30707@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 05:08:03 +0400
From: George Shuklin <george.shuklin@...il.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why minor is still 8 bit?
On 05.06.2012 04:52, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/04/2012 11:59 AM, George Shuklin wrote:
>> Very simple sample: I'd like to create shared storage to publish volumes
>> via ISCSI. ~60Tb of drives, ~2Gb average disk size = 30k disk images.
>> Can I just create a bunch of LV and export them by iet or scst? Nope:
>> There is a serious limit for amount of active LV per host. Yes, I can
>> create filesystem, put images (as file) to that filesystem and publish
>> them back, but why FS is needed to do such simple task?
> You realize that with that many volumes, a logical volume manager *is* a
> filesystem, right?
>
> -hpa
Well, I have nothing against filesystem with very small 'db-like'
footprint: no directories, no attributes, extra-large allocation block,
very fast initialization, no random file growth (very calm metadata
without constant updating). If someone do have that type of FS (for disk
images storage) - why not?
Anyway, using LVM to provide logical volumes to customers seems be fine
(at least by name). But that limitation for minor is breaking whole idea.
I don't ask 'please fix', I'm just curious why so small?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists