Von Fugal wrote:
<quote name="Von Fugal" date="Thu, 27 Mar 2008 at 22:24 -0600">
a couple of weeks ago simple ordinary LVM scared me...
Oh, and if you think that's scary... I made a loopback, put a pv on it,
made a vg then lv on it... then I formatted and mounted my new lv,
created another file on it, made a loopback on that and tried to add it
to the same vg and lv. Yes I am crazy. Yes it crashed. I was just
fooling around, OK?? ;)
Von Fugal
Nested loopbacks sounds like a complete headache but also completely
awesome. :) I am not surprised at all that it crashed.
As for your questions:
It sounds like as good of plan as any considering that you can't resize
the partition on 'surfer.' The only other thing I would recommend is to
get a bigger disk than 'surfer' is, copy the data off, repartition, then
copy data back. But if you had the bigger disks, it would be easier just
to add it to the vg that 'shark' is on.
As for having it up at boot up, it is going to depend on when your
distro starts LVM. If it happens in the initrd/initramfs, then to make
sure the loopback is there, you will need to edit the initrd/initramfs
and add a script that sets up the loopback. Not really fun. If your
distro starts LVM after boot, then all you need to do is make sure that
you have a script that sets up the loop back before LVM starts. Use your
distros way of putting that script before LVM. The other option would be
to make it so that the lv doesn't mount automatically with the other
file systems at boot and then add a script at the end of the boot
sequence that sets up the loopback, rescans for the pvs, and then mount
the lv. (To many acronyms in that sentence.)
I don't have a clue on the third question since I am not a file system
or block device expert. My guess is that as the sparse file grows, it
will get rather fragmented as it fills up the drive and shows things down.
Anyways.
Mike
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
