| 1 |
On 17/09/2013 11:49, Grant wrote: |
| 2 |
>>>>> Is the Gentoo Software RAID + LVM guide the best place for RAID |
| 3 |
>>>>> install info if I'm not using LVM and I'll have a hardware RAID |
| 4 |
>>>>> controller? |
| 5 |
>>>> |
| 6 |
>>>> Not ready to take the ZFS plunge? That would greatly reduce the complexity |
| 7 |
>>>> of RAID+LVM, since ZFS best practice is to set your hardware raid controller |
| 8 |
>>>> to JBOD mode and let ZFS take care of the RAID - and no LVM required (ZFS |
| 9 |
>>>> has mucho better tools). That is my next big project for when I switch to my |
| 10 |
>>>> next new server. |
| 11 |
>>>> |
| 12 |
>>>> I'm just hoping I can get comfortable with a process for getting ZFS |
| 13 |
>>>> compiled into the kernel that is workable/tenable for ongoing kernel updates |
| 14 |
>>>> (with minimal fear of breaking things due to a complex/fragile |
| 15 |
>>>> methodology)... |
| 16 |
>>> |
| 17 |
>>> Can't you just emerge zfs-kmod? Or maybe you're trying to do it |
| 18 |
>>> without module support? |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> @tanstaafl's kernels have no module support. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> OK, but why exclude module support? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Noooooooooo, please for the love of god and all that's holy, let's not |
| 27 |
go there again :-) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
taanstafl has his reasons for using fully monolithic kernels without |
| 30 |
module support. This works for him and nothing will dissuade him from |
| 31 |
this strategy - we tried, we really did. He won. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 36 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives