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
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?
2) Are there any good websites which compare lvm against traditional
partitioning? Like what a
29 matches
Mail list logo
