Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 01:12:54PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
[snip]
their systems. The advantage usually touted is that one can easily
add new discs. But I'd rather have one large disc than several small
ones, anyway. I suppose one who constantly installed one OS
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 01:12:54PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:06:38AM -0400, E0x wrote:
> >
> >>i asking it because i was thinking in use lvm in desktop setup , and i can
> >>live with a harddisk lose and the data on it , but not with all
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:06:38AM -0400, E0x wrote:
i asking it because i was thinking in use lvm in desktop setup , and i can
live with a harddisk lose and the data on it , but not with all data lost
for a desktop setup, using lvm over several small disks is es
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:06:38AM -0400, E0x wrote:
> i asking it because i was thinking in use lvm in desktop setup , and i can
> live with a harddisk lose and the data on it , but not with all data lost
for a desktop setup, using lvm over several small disks is essentially
the same thing as usi
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:06:38AM -0400, E0x wrote:
> i asking it because i was thinking in use lvm in desktop setup , and i can
> live with a harddisk lose and the data on it , but not with all data lost
>
> pd: i have some small HD
>
> On 12/29/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:06:38AM -0400, E0x wrote:
> i asking it because i was thinking in use lvm in desktop setup , and i can
> live with a harddisk lose and the data on it , but not with all data lost
>
Then carefully read the LVM documentation. There is a way to do what
you want, but I woul
i asking it because i was thinking in use lvm in desktop setup , and i can
live with a harddisk lose and the data on it , but not with all data lost
pd: i have some small HD
On 12/29/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 10:50:53AM -0400, E0x wrote:
> a ques
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 10:50:53AM -0400, E0x wrote:
> a question about lvm , if i have 3 harddisk in a lvm setup for save data ,
> and dont have any raid setup , just lvm for make a big virtual HD , now on
> of the 3 HD goes damage i can start with the other 2 left and only missing
> the data th
a question about lvm , if i have 3 harddisk in a lvm setup for save data ,
and dont have any raid setup , just lvm for make a big virtual HD , now on
of the 3 HD goes damage i can start with the other 2 left and only missing
the data that was copy in the 3 HD area ?
pd: sorry for my english
On
On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 11:00:35AM -0500, Jay Zach wrote:
>
> I've played around with LVM a bit, but not a LOT
>
> I've often wondered if you have non-raid partitions making up the PV's of the
> LV's, and had a PV fail what would happen
Generally, that is a Bad Thing(TM).
> Since all
On Saturday 23 December 2006 12:30, Alan Chandler wrote:
> On Friday 22 December 2006 23:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > I don't know about booting LVM, though. I
> > think you still need traditional partitions for that.
>
> I have everything on raid but not lvm - but LVM I then use for
>
>
On Sunday 24 December 2006 18:38, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 05:59:23PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Great. By the way, was that on a sarge or and etch? Or something
> > else?
>
> Sarge. Most of my machines have a similar setup.
It works great with etch as well.
On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 05:59:23PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Great. By the way, was that on a sarge or and etch? Or something else?
>
Sarge. Most of my machines have a similar setup.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.c
On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 05:34:33PM -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 05:15:20PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Can /var live on LVM, or is it needed on my nonLVM root partition for
> > boot purposes?
> >
> $ mount |grep ^\/dev
> /dev/md1 on / type ext3 (rw)
> /d
On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 05:15:20PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Can /var live on LVM, or is it needed on my nonLVM root partition for
> boot purposes?
>
$ mount |grep ^\/dev
/dev/md1 on / type ext3 (rw)
/dev/md0 on /boot type ext2 (rw)
/dev/mapper/vg00-home on /home type ext3 (rw,nosuid,n
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 04:50:58PM -0700, Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> On Friday 22 December 2006 15:09, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> > I heard lvm can be used to have partitions whose sizes can be changed
> > over time in non-destructive way as far as the data is concerned.
> > 1) Does anyone use t
On Sun 2006-12-24 08:09:04 +, Alan Chandler wrote:
> On Saturday 23 December 2006 17:31, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 05:30:43PM +, Alan Chandler wrote:
> > >
> > > I have everything on raid but not lvm - but LVM I then use for
> > >
> > > /var/cache
> > > /usr/l
On Sat, 2006-12-23 at 16:51 -0500, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> On Friday 22 December 2006 17:09, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> > I heard lvm can be used to have partitions whose sizes can be changed over
> > time in non-destructive way as far as the data is concerned.
> >
>
> Thanks for all the pr
On Saturday 23 December 2006 17:31, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 05:30:43PM +, Alan Chandler wrote:
> >
> > I have everything on raid but not lvm - but LVM I then use for
> >
> > /var/cache
> > /usr/lib/openoffice
>
> heh heh. that's funny. I know its bloated, but givi
On Friday 22 December 2006 17:09, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> I heard lvm can be used to have partitions whose sizes can be changed over
> time in non-destructive way as far as the data is concerned.
>
Thanks for all the previous replies. Another small question.
I currently have Windows on this
On Sat, 2006-12-23 at 15:04 -0500, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> On Friday 22 December 2006 17:09, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> > I heard lvm can be used to have partitions whose sizes can be changed over
> > time in non-destructive way as far as the data is concerned.
> >
>
> Another basic questio
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 03:04:03PM -0500, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
>
> Another basic question regarding the use of lvm. If I have traditionally
> partitioned harddrive running debian Etch, can I make those partitions use
> lvm without loosing any data? I have been reading the HOWTO at
> http:
On Friday 22 December 2006 17:09, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> I heard lvm can be used to have partitions whose sizes can be changed over
> time in non-destructive way as far as the data is concerned.
>
Another basic question regarding the use of lvm. If I have traditionally
partitioned harddrive
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 05:30:43PM +, Alan Chandler wrote:
> On Friday 22 December 2006 23:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > I don't know about booting LVM, though. I
> > think you still need traditional partitions for that.
>
> You can, but you need your initramfs to load the appropriate
On Friday 22 December 2006 23:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> I don't know about booting LVM, though. I
> think you still need traditional partitions for that.
You can, but you need your initramfs to load the appropriate modules.
(I do not - I prefer to make a standard size partition for Roo
On Friday 22 December 2006 15:09, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> I heard lvm can be used to have partitions whose sizes can be changed
> over time in non-destructive way as far as the data is concerned.
> 1) Does anyone use this or is it still in an experimental state?
It's very stable and is used a
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 05:09:56PM -0500, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> I heard lvm can be used to have partitions whose sizes can be changed over
> time in non-destructive way as far as the data is concerned.
>
> 1) Does anyone use this or is it still in an experimental state?
I use this on my h
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 05:09:56PM -0500, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> I heard lvm can be used to have partitions whose sizes can be changed over
> time in non-destructive way as far as the data is concerned.
>
> 1) Does anyone use this or is it still in an experimental state?
>
Most definitely
28 matches
Mail list logo
