[Bug 134638] Add striping to lvm creation
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=134638
--- Comment #29 from Alasdair Kergon <agk(a)redhat.com> 2010-04-27 17:21:00 EDT ---
The default behaviour has to be satisfactory for all users. There are also
choices in defining fallback behaviour - how do 'variable' numbers of stripes
interact with the existing allocation policies?
And if I have 5 disks with different amounts of free space on each: I try
striping across all 5 but it doesn't fit. Do I then try 4? Then 3, 2 before
falling back to linear? Or do I stripe as much as I can 5-way, then try to
find the remaining space 4-way, then what still remains, 3-way etc.?
Striping offers some people (not everyone) improved performance at the cost of
making data recoverability useless for most people. The default option must
err on the side of better recoverability. People who have already taken
measures to protect against data loss (mirrors, frequent backups) or whose data
has no special value (e.g. installations that are easily recreated) can opt for
'better performance'.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 11 months
[Bug 134638] Add striping to lvm creation
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=134638
--- Comment #28 from Marc Bejarano <bugzilla.redhat(a)beej.org> 2010-04-27 16:05:18 EDT ---
hi, alasdair.
i think the default should benefit the most number of people without causing
disaster for the minority. i don't think there are many users who have so many
disks that striping them (as opposed to a linear default) wouldn't be what they
want. those that do likely have high budgets and high in-house expertise and
can handle changing the default to suit their needs.
so i would vote for turning on striping with the maximum possible by default
for all with the ability to opt out in anaconda.
re: lvextend, in the absence of numbers proving otherwise, i'd guess many more
people would gain from having a better default at install time than would lose
from more complexity later on. why not start here?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 11 months
[Bug 248408] Applet doesn't list running KVM domains
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=248408
Cole Robinson <crobinso(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
--- Comment #11 from Cole Robinson <crobinso(a)redhat.com> 2010-04-27 12:20:00 EDT ---
gnome-applet-vm is dead upstream, and no bugs will be fixed in F11.
virt-manager provides an applet in F12+ which obsoletes gnome-applet-vm.
Closing as WONTFIX.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 11 months
[Bug 179072] _dl_debug_state() RT_CONSISTENT called too early
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=179072
John Reiser <jreiser(a)bitwagon.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version|11 |13
--- Comment #20 from John Reiser <jreiser(a)bitwagon.com> 2010-04-27 11:45:19 EDT ---
This bug still is present in Fedora 13, glibc-2.11.90-20; I am changing Version
of this bug to 13. Here is the session of Comment #2 on x86_64:
(gdb) set stop-on-solib-events 1
(gdb) run
Starting program: /home/jreiser/179072/my_main
Stopped due to shared library event
(gdb) info shared
>From To Syms Read Shared Object Library
0x0000003712e00af0 0x0000003712e198e4 Yes /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
(gdb) c
Continuing.
Stopped due to shared library event
(gdb) info shared
>From To Syms Read Shared Object Library
0x0000003712e00af0 0x0000003712e198e4 Yes /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
0x0000003713e00de0 0x0000003713e01998 Yes /lib64/libdl.so.2
0x000000371321e9a0 0x000000371332f620 Yes /lib64/libc.so.6
(gdb) c
Continuing.
Stopped due to shared library event
(gdb) info shared
>From To Syms Read Shared Object Library
0x0000003712e00af0 0x0000003712e198e4 Yes /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
0x0000003713e00de0 0x0000003713e01998 Yes /lib64/libdl.so.2
0x000000371321e9a0 0x000000371332f620 Yes /lib64/libc.so.6
(gdb) c
Continuing.
Stopped due to shared library event
(gdb) info shared
>From To Syms Read Shared Object Library
0x0000003712e00af0 0x0000003712e198e4 Yes /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
0x0000003713e00de0 0x0000003713e01998 Yes /lib64/libdl.so.2
0x000000371321e9a0 0x000000371332f620 Yes /lib64/libc.so.6
0x00007ffff7de84b0 0x00007ffff7de85e8 Yes ./my_lib.so
(gdb) print sub1(42)
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x000000000000048e in ?? ()
The program being debugged was signaled while in a function called from GDB.
GDB remains in the frame where the signal was received.
To change this behavior use "set unwindonsignal on".
Evaluation of the expression containing the function
(sub1) will be abandoned.
When the function is done executing, GDB will silently stop.
(gdb) x/i $pc
=> 0x48e: Cannot access memory at address 0x48e
(gdb) x/12i sub1
0x7ffff7de857c <sub1>: push %rbp
0x7ffff7de857d <sub1+1>: mov %rsp,%rbp
0x7ffff7de8580 <sub1+4>: sub $0x10,%rsp
0x7ffff7de8584 <sub1+8>: mov %edi,-0x4(%rbp)
0x7ffff7de8587 <sub1+11>: lea 0x68(%rip),%rax # 0x7ffff7de85f6
0x7ffff7de858e <sub1+18>: mov -0x4(%rbp),%edx
0x7ffff7de8591 <sub1+21>: mov %edx,%esi
0x7ffff7de8593 <sub1+23>: mov %rax,%rdi
0x7ffff7de8596 <sub1+26>: mov $0x0,%eax
0x7ffff7de859b <sub1+31>: callq 0x7ffff7de8488 <printf@plt>
0x7ffff7de85a0 <sub1+36>: leaveq
0x7ffff7de85a1 <sub1+37>: retq
(gdb) x/i 0x7ffff7de8488
0x7ffff7de8488 <printf@plt>: jmpq *0x2003aa(%rip) # 0x7ffff7fe8838
(gdb) x/xg 0x7ffff7fe8838
0x7ffff7fe8838: 0x000000000000048e
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 11 months