[Discuss] LVM vs File system file for KVM Virtual Machines?

[kramerjm at gmail.com (Jay Kramer)]

Great discussion.  Thanks
Jay
 On Mar 29, 2012 2:12 PM, "Mark Woodward" <markw at mohawksoft.com> wrote:

> On 03/29/2012 01:59 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>
>>
>> I see very little, if any, argument in favor of using the file.  I
>> suppose,
>> if you wanted to run your virtual head on some other machine, then you
>> could
>> export your file via NFS instead of iscsi, and that gives you one extra
>> degree of freedom if you're using a file.  Also, if you got something
>> like a
>> snapshotting storage server, you could migrate your file over to that
>> server, and benefit by snapshots.
>>
> The only reason why I would consider a "file" instead of an LVM volume is
> that you have a "file" that can be copied and backed up easily. It is
> relocatable in that it cam be moved from one file system to another and it
> can bring its size with it. The LVM device is more or less dependent on the
> LVM create command and the admin ensuring that a properly sized device is
> created if you want to move it to a different machine. I guess you could us
> dd to copy the device (or a snapshot) to a file to move it around, but you
> see the issue.
>
> There are definitely a list of pros and cons. It's interesting to see what
> other people think. So far, I think the "pros" go to LVM.
> ______________________________**_________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/**listinfo/discuss<http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>