No, it's not possible with LVM alone. LVM is designed to simplify the management of multiple, different devices by grouping them together. Bonus is a slight speed improvement. If you loose one drive with LVM, the data on it is gone for good too, but it's easy to extend the size.
Since I am not very fluent in LVM, I set-up a virtual KVM/Qemu guest with Linux in order to play with LVM and investigate possible failures scenario. Enclosed the results of my experiments.
I have the following setup: a volume group containing the following physical volume /dev/vda6, /dev/vdb2 and /dev/vdb3. I have only one logical volume than spans the entire volume group. ext3 is used as filesystem.
It is possible to save the current volume group meta information using vgcfgbackup.
I failed /dev/vdb3, /dev/vdb2 and /dev/vda6 respectively (zeroed the partition using dd). For vdb2 and vdb3, I could restore the ext3 filesystem as follows:
- recreate the physical volume of the failed partition, giving the right uuid label.
- restore the volume group meta information using vgcfgrestore
- repairing the ext3 filesystem using fsck.
As expected, only the files from the failed partition were missing after the restore operation.
However, I failed to restore the file system if /dev/vda6 gets damaged. I used an alternate superblock for fsck (one located on vdb2 or vdb3), but no avail. I lost information about the data stored on vdb2 and vdb3 (they can be found in lost+found, but name is lost). I didn't managed so far to recover the file system if the first disk (i.e. where the primary superblock is) failed. I still need to investigate what's wrong.
What do you think about these recovery possibilities? No point however that RAID+LVM looks safer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeNuke2
how about opensolaris with ZFS? there are many tutorials on ZFS and how to build a home NAS system...
That could be definitively worse a try. But I'll first investigate on the system where I am most knowledgeable about.