Open Stack

Brady, thanks for the infos and for the bugzilla link.

I made some tests and some some other researches about potential performance penalties of LVM. These seem not to be noticeable especially with recent linux versions. (please see for instance [1]).

Now I'm even more curious about the choice of canonical: there must be a good reason for using such "rough" (pass me the term) filesystem resize technique over a more clean and practical lvm resize. 

Any thoughts?

Cheers,
 Davide.

[1] http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/7122/does-lvm-impact-performance

On 08/feb/2013, at 11:53, Pádraig Brady <P at draigBrady.com> wrote:

> On 02/08/2013 08:55 AM, Davide Guerri wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm preparing some cloud images for the major Linux distributions and I'd like they to grow their root fs on boot (to use all the available space).
>> 
>> Ubuntu cloud images (http://cloud-images.ubuntu.com) use initramfs-growroot but installing it (and maintaining it across kernel upgrade) could be tricky -at least for me- on redhat derived like centos or fedora.
> 
> Note cloud-utils (including growroot) is currently in review for Red Hat flavored distros:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907756
> 
>> So my question is: what are pros and cons of using an ext3/4 root-fs and initramfs-growroot, or LVM (with a custom script that runs on first boot)?
> 
> LVM might be a bit heavy weight for this?
> 
> cheers,
> Pádraig.