I have to chime in here, as I've watched this thread... errrmm 'evolve'.

I've had excellent experiences with LVM, both personally and in enterprise-wide deployments, by default.  I've also helped a number of friends with their at-home linux explorations.  A number of times, both personally and professionally, LVM by virtue of being installed by default, has saved the day.  I've had situations where the user/owner needed to expand or migrate space, and with LVM it was a trivial exercise to accomplish that.  The overhead discussion I believe is overblown... LVM obviously has a smidge of overhead when used... but in enterprise deployments that washes out as noise compared to the value it brings when problems arise.  Edge cases where fedora is leveraged on older hardware with limited resources, are just that... edge cases.

Bottom line, it seems the quibbling is over perceptions, past issues/successes and choices regarding implementation.  Maybe it would be best to agree there are differences, there is value in that, and lets focus on more tangible issues each of us can meaningfully contribute to.

Thank you.

R,
-Joe


From: Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan@gmail.com>
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: encrypting /home partition post-install

On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 19:07 -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan@gmail.com> said:
> > On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 15:31 -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> > > With LVM, I still get /dev/vg_foo/lv_bar, and
> > > don't care what raw device the underlying partition is, how it is
> > > connected, etc. (very useful for example when taking an internal
> > > drive from one computer and connecting it via an external adapter
> > > of
> > > some type on another).
> >
> > Which is fine if a) the second machine also runs LVM (what if it's
> > on
> > an Ubuntu machine without LVM, rather than Fedora?) and b) the two
> > use
> > the same LVM logical layout.
>
> For (a), the only Ubuntu system I have access to also has LVM; do
> they not even install the lvm tools?

I've no idea. I don't even have a Ubuntu installation. It was a
hypothetical question. For Ubuntu susbstitute Mint, Opensuse or
whatever. Not all Linux distros install LVM by default.

> For (b), I have no idea what you mean by "same LVM logical
> layout".  The PV size, VG and LV names, etc. are all part of a
> particular device. They don't have to match in any way a separate
> device (on the same or on a different computer).

A good demonstration of the problems with LVM terminology. What do you
mean by device? I often feel that many of the issues people have with
LVM are caused by this sort of thing. I last used LVM several years ago
and clearly remember reading over the docs multiple times before making
what should have been a simple change, before finally resorting to
asking the list. I don't doubt that people who use it every day are
comfortable with it, but most of us just don't, so if I had to repeat
the experience I would no doubt go through the same learning curve only
to forget it again when I finished.