says Grub needs to be 1.95 or higher to boot from a /boot on an
lvm. Does that mean Fedora is yet to include that capability?
The package is called grub2. :)
And the latest release 1.97xxx.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman
in the F12 repos, I saw the grub version is 0.97. Whereas the
link says Grub needs to be 1.95 or higher to boot from a /boot on an
lvm. Does that mean Fedora is yet to include that capability?
The package is called grub2. :)
And the latest release 1.97xxx.
That explains it! I was looking
On 12/08/2009 07:45 AM, Tom H wrote:
hat you had asked for this info.
This is from the Grub 2 wiki:
http://grub.enbug.org/LVMandRAID
Thank you Tom, its much appreciated, but you forgot that you have
already posted that. :)
You're welcome. By the end of this week I will have done four
From Suvayu Ali (in the Getting rid of /boot thread)
Could you please point me to the documentation for this? I would
really like to read up more and understand what limitations/advantages
I might have as I have been waiting for this to be included since F10.
Sorry Suvayu. Just remembered that
in Fedora
is capable of that.
$ grub --version
grub (GNU GRUB 0.97)
Even in the F12 repos, I saw the grub version is 0.97. Whereas the
link says Grub needs to be 1.95 or higher to boot from a /boot on an
lvm. Does that mean Fedora is yet to include that capability?
This thread has been very
Third update: I made it work. I had some space on the drive so I created new
partition for / where I installed F12.
Raid/LVM2 support in F12 upgrade DVD is not completely broken but it
displays errors and warning when it tries to mount/inspect my
raid1 md partitions (I have lvm2 on top of them).
Update - I tried to boot upgrade DVD for F10 which I had by hand and it very
quickly recognized all my raid/lvm arrays and offered me to install the
system to them.
*So it seems that Raid/LVM2 support in F12 upgrade DVD is broken!!!*
I'm going to reinstall F11. Then I my try to upgrade via yum
Hi guys,
I tried to upgrade F11 with soft raid F12. So far I used yum to upgrade
Fedora 1 up to F11. My yum update went wrong and my server wes forcefully
rebooted in the middle so none kernel from F11 works anymore.
After I booted F12 DVD - if I select Install or Upgrade and Replace
existing
with f11's Anaconda, using its default settings to partition
the two drives into one big LVM volume, with separate /boot and swap.
Can someone point me in the right direction to find out how to access the
partition hidden somewhere within that 20 gigs of bits?
recipes welcome.
Thanks
to the disks in the
901 (thereby blowing away my F12 installation, btw.)
I created them with f11's Anaconda, using its default settings to partition
the two drives into one big LVM volume, with separate /boot and swap.
Can someone point me in the right direction to find out how to access
.)
I created them with f11's Anaconda, using its default settings to partition
the two drives into one big LVM volume, with separate /boot and swap.
Can someone point me in the right direction to find out how to access the
partition hidden somewhere within that 20 gigs of bits?
recipes welcome
to the disks in the
901 (thereby blowing away my F12 installation, btw.)
I created them with f11's Anaconda, using its default settings to partition
the two drives into one big LVM volume, with separate /boot and swap.
Can someone point me in the right direction to find out how to access
for /boot and the rest of the disk
allocated for LVM:
Disk /dev/sda: 320.0 GB, 320072933376 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x07b4
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1
. There should be an entry under
/dev/mapper (eg /dev/mapper/SANVOL) or whatever you called it, which is
the device you use to create the filesystems, logical volumes,
partitions etc. You'll still see /dev/sda and /dev/sdb in
/proc/partitions though.
It's also recommended you exclude lvm (/etc
Il giorno ven, 16/10/2009 alle 15.37 -0400, Tait Clarridge ha scritto:
Hello,
Boot into a LiveCD
e2fsck -f /dev/vg_taitsvolume/lv_root
resize2fs -p /dev/vg_taitsvolume/lv_root 30G
lvreduce --size 30G vg_taitsvolume/lv_root --test
lvreduce --size 30G vg_taitsvolume/lv_root
i suggest to
Ambrogio wrote:
e2fsck -f /dev/vg_taitsvolume/lv_root
resize2fs -p /dev/vg_taitsvolume/lv_root 30G
lvreduce --size 30G vg_taitsvolume/lv_root --test
lvreduce --size 30G vg_taitsvolume/lv_root
i suggest to reduce the LV to a little more than 30G, or you have to
calculate at block level the
On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 15:45 +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
Ambrogio wrote:
e2fsck -f /dev/vg_taitsvolume/lv_root
resize2fs -p /dev/vg_taitsvolume/lv_root 30G
lvreduce --size 30G vg_taitsvolume/lv_root --test
lvreduce --size 30G vg_taitsvolume/lv_root
i suggest to reduce the LV to a
to smaller drive
use gparted to resize /dev/sda2 to maximum allowed
pvresize /dev/sda2
lvextend /dev/vg_hornet/lv_root /dev/sda2
e2fsck -f /dev/vg_hornet/lv_root
resize2fs /dev/vg_hornet/lv_root
So, will this work? Are there any steps I can take out? I haven't really
played with LVM before (at all) so
/sda2
e2fsck -f /dev/vg_hornet/lv_root
resize2fs /dev/vg_hornet/lv_root
So, will this work? Are there any steps I can take out? I haven't really
played with LVM before (at all) so I thought I would come up with my own
steps through the man pages and put it to the list to see if anyone has
memory)
(I chose 40GB to keep it away from the maximum of 60GB so there are no
issues with block sizes/sectors)
use gparted to resize /dev/sda2 to 40G
dd to smaller drive
These steps should not be necessary as part of the advantage if LVM[1]
is moving the LV's around.
use gparted
Hi,
I'm trying to create a multipath environment for my server attached to
a hp 2012sa msa disk storage device. Where I am struggling is
understanding some low level concepts.
I've setup the multipath config file, and can see the following enteries:
multipath -ll
mpath0
Arun Shrimali wrote:
As you said I used the normal install disk and using rescue mode,
I ask for continue and read only mode
Continue --
Error processing LVM
There is inconsistent LVM data on logical volume
Vg-resobank-LogVol02. you can reinitialise all related PVs (/dev/sda1)
which
said I used the normal install disk and using rescue mode,
I ask for continue and read only mode
Continue --
Error processing LVM
There is inconsistent LVM data on logical volume
Vg-resobank-LogVol02. you can reinitialise all related PVs (/dev/sda1)
which will erase the LVM metadata, or ignore which
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Arun Shrimali arun.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Mikkel L. Ellertson
mik...@infinity-ltd.com wrote:
Arun Shrimali wrote:
Dear All,
Recently I have loaded Fedora 11, but yesterday fedora refused to boot.
on googling I have
Please, do not post is HTML!
Arun Shrimali wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Mikkel wrote:
What happens when you try to boot? Do you get an error message? If
so, what is it?
/Boot disk failure/
If Grub is loading, you may be able to boot with the
previous kernel. If Grub is
Dear All,
Is there nobody who can help me in recovering data .
Arun
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Arun Shrimaliarun.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear All,
Recently I have loaded Fedora 11, but yesterday fedora refused to boot.
on googling I have found that testdisk is the best tool to
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Arun Shrimaliarun.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear All,
Is there nobody who can help me in recovering data .
I'd make a copy of the data using dd_rescue or something similar
first, then test your recovery methods using the copy. Its not clear
if you have
Arun Shrimali wrote:
Dear All,
Recently I have loaded Fedora 11, but yesterday fedora refused to boot.
on googling I have found that testdisk is the best tool to recover the
data, but end of it ...
Weather testdisk is the best tool depends on what the problem is.
What
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Mikkel L. Ellertson
mik...@infinity-ltd.com wrote:
Arun Shrimali wrote:
Dear All,
Recently I have loaded Fedora 11, but yesterday fedora refused to boot.
on googling I have found that testdisk is the best tool to recover the
data, but end of it
Dear All,
Recently I have loaded Fedora 11, but yesterday fedora refused to boot.
on googling I have found that testdisk is the best tool to recover the
data, but end of it ...
My steps are as attached
finally it give me error as follows :
The harddisk (80 GB/74Gib) seems too
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
That device is the encrypted block device that lvm is stored on. tune2fs
isn't going to like that though.
As we are talking about the root filesystem, a simple df or
mount or cat /etc/fstab could show the device mounted on the
mount point /.
--
Roberto Ragusamail
After upgrading to Fedora 11 x86_64, I started to look into converting
to EXT4 from EXT3.
My / partition is an lvm that is encrypted (I do have a separate /boot).
I tried following the instructions using tune2fs -O
extents,uninit_bg,dir_index /dev/sda2 (my / device and /boot is
/dev/sda1).
I
On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 13:05:09 -0600,
Andrig T. Miller andrig.t.mil...@gmail.com wrote:
After upgrading to Fedora 11 x86_64, I started to look into converting
to EXT4 from EXT3.
My / partition is an lvm that is encrypted (I do have a separate /boot).
I tried following the instructions
. Miller andrig.t.mil...@gmail.com wrote:
After upgrading to Fedora 11 x86_64, I started to look into converting
to EXT4 from EXT3.
My / partition is an lvm that is encrypted (I do have a separate /boot).
I tried following the instructions using tune2fs -O
extents,uninit_bg,dir_index /dev
On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 13:37:32 -0600,
Andrig T. Miller andrig.t.mil...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I found it under /dev/mapper, and it is as follows:
luks-89b2dea1-11d5-4d7f-b355-ffec575a1b09
I'll try this in a moment, and see if it works.
That won't be what you want. lvm must export
On Sun, 2009-06-21 at 18:15 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote:
You'll also want to watch out for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506189
Good times!
Uggg...
- Gilboa
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
You'll also want to watch out for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506189
Good times!
--
Ian Pilcher arequip...@gmail.com
Hello all,
While not strictly a -devel issue, the advise I'm seeking does raise an
interesting issue.
I've got a number of workstations running a combination of F9 and F10.
All are using LVM over software RAID5. (DM)
I've done a test upgrade on the workstation (including a partial
migration
Gilboa Davara wrote:
Far worse, the F9 workstations are reaching EOL, and I cannot install
F10 on them due to known anaconda issue (That was fixed during the F11
devel cycle) so in short, I'm in deep ...
Can you upgrade them by Yum? That should avoid any Anaconda bugs.
Björn Persson
On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 16:34 +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
Gilboa Davara wrote:
Far worse, the F9 workstations are reaching EOL, and I cannot install
F10 on them due to known anaconda issue (That was fixed during the F11
devel cycle) so in short, I'm in deep ...
Can you upgrade them by
On 2009-06-20 10:55:20 AM, Gilboa Davara wrote:
While not strictly a -devel issue, the advise I'm seeking does raise an
interesting issue.
I've got a number of workstations running a combination of F9 and F10.
All are using LVM over software RAID5. (DM)
What I would do is see if the Anaconda
After installing F11 on a new hard disk (I used the upgrade to F11 as an
excuse to buy a faster disk) a now want to copy over some data from the
old hard disk containing F10. I attached the old drive to the system via
a sata-to-usb converter but I am unable to mount any of the lvm
partitions
Jurgen Kramer gtmkra...@xs4all.nl writes:
VolGroup00 is the partition I want to mount.
What magic commands do I need to be able to mount the lvm partition on
the external drive?
Probably you need to do this:
# lvm
lvm vgchange -ay VolGroup00
lvm exit
If I were you, I'd also take
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 10:46 -0700, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
Jurgen Kramer gtmkra...@xs4all.nl writes:
VolGroup00 is the partition I want to mount.
What magic commands do I need to be able to mount the lvm partition on
the external drive?
Probably you need to do this:
# lvm
lvm
My root filesystem is on a logical volume; the volume group is spread
across multiple software RAID (md) devices.
mkinitrd in Fedora 11 is ignoring all but one of the md devices. It
only includes a mdadm -A ... line in the nash script for that device,
and it would presumably only include the
Could you post the bug number?
Thanks
Bob
My apologies. I intended to include that information in the original post.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496440
Thanks,
--Brian
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
Has anyone successfully installed F11 x86_64 using RAID1 or LVM on top
of RAID1? If so, what was the key to your success? I'm looking for
some suggestions.
I must admit that I'm getting a bit frustrated with Fedora releases that
have Anaconda partitioning issues. It seems that every second
Could you post the bug number?
Thanks
Bob
On 06/11/2009 06:27 PM, Brian Hanks wrote:
Has anyone successfully installed F11 x86_64 using RAID1 or LVM on top
of RAID1? If so, what was the key to your success? I'm looking for
some suggestions.
I must admit that I'm getting a bit frustrated
system-config-lvm, and run
through
the process of creating actual logical volumes and setting them up as
filesystems.
It's actually very simple and painless.
I burst out laughing when I read this.
I'm not sure if I should be happy or unhappy about your
laughter...especially since my response
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Mike Burger mbur...@bubbanfriends.orgwrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Mike Burger
mbur...@bubbanfriends.orgwrote:
What you'll want to do, now, is to run system-config-lvm, and run
through
the process of creating actual logical volumes and setting
David Burns wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Mike Burger mbur...@bubbanfriends.orgwrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Mike Burger
mbur...@bubbanfriends.orgwrote:
What you'll want to do, now, is to run system-config-lvm, and run
through
the process of creating actual logical volumes
Mike Burger wrote:
It's actually very simple and painless.
LVM is reasonably simple.
But in my view its disadvantages -
particularly the difficulty of dealing with any kind of corruption -
far outweigh its advantages.
The main advantage - the ease with which partition sizes
can be changed
On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 13:26 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Mike Burger wrote:
It's actually very simple and painless.
LVM is reasonably simple.
But in my view its disadvantages -
particularly the difficulty of dealing with any kind of corruption -
far outweigh its advantages.
I agree
was said and done the drive ended up looking like this:
/dev/sda1 * 1 13 104391 83 Linux
/dev/sda2 14243519454715 83 Linux
/dev/sda32436485719454715 8e Linux LVM
/dev/sda44858996441021977
* 1 13 104391 83 Linux
/dev/sda2 14243519454715 83 Linux
/dev/sda32436485719454715 8e Linux LVM
/dev/sda44858996441021977+ 5 Extended
/dev/sda54858727919454683+ 8e Linux
each.
When all was said and done the drive ended up looking like this:
/dev/sda1 * 1 13 104391 83 Linux
/dev/sda2 14243519454715 83 Linux
/dev/sda32436485719454715 8e Linux LVM
/dev/sda448589964
system-config-lvm, and run through
the process of creating actual logical volumes and setting them up as
filesystems.
It's actually very simple and painless.
I burst out laughing when I read this.
Dave
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com
Carl D. Roth wrote:
You need to do two things:
1) make sure the VG name on the USB drive is not the same as your new
system. If both drives have the same VG name you will have problems.
2) after attaching the USB drive, run
# pvscan
# vgchange -a y
Note that LVM isn't
to my new one.
I thought that the easiest way would be to use my USB external caddy,
but I have a problem. The box sees the drive, and mounts /boot no
problem.
However, I don't have access to the main contents as they were handled
by LVM. How can I now acces those filesystems?
You need
have a problem. The box sees the drive, and mounts /boot no problem.
However, I don't have access to the main contents as they were handled by LVM.
How can I now acces those filesystems?
The state of the PC is:
[r...@lcomp5 ~]# mount
/dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00 on / type ext3 (rw)
/proc
be to use my USB external caddy, but I
have a problem. The box sees the drive, and mounts /boot no problem.
However, I don't have access to the main contents as they were handled by
LVM.
How can I now acces those filesystems?
Probably the easiest would be to run system-config-lvm. In Grub
On Friday 20 March 2009 18:52:59 Aldo Foot wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Frank Cox thea...@sasktel.net wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:24:14 +
Bill Crawford wrote:
You should probably be able to get some sense out of this by doing:
# vgrename
of reading about logical volumes and some of what
I've found is self-contradictory, incomplete and stuff that I just don't
really understand (yet.) And, as you can imagine, since this is my main
desktop machine I'm not terribly anxious to just start playing around with
the lvm configuration without
On Monday 23 March 2009 15:53:01 Robin Laing wrote:
There needs to be a firm way of changing and editing LVM characteristics
in these situations.
Yeah, boot from rescue disk and rename the first one it sees, should then let
the other be visible. You could, at a pinch, change the partition
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Robin Laing
robin.la...@drdc-rddc.gc.ca wrote:
There needs to be a firm way of changing and editing LVM characteristics in
these situations.
--
Robin Laing
Hopefully the LVM toolset will be refined overtime. Rick said he'd
look into the bugzilla
reports
Aldo Foot wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Robin Laing
robin.la...@drdc-rddc.gc.ca wrote:
There needs to be a firm way of changing and editing LVM characteristics in
these situations.
--
Robin Laing
Hopefully the LVM toolset will be refined overtime. Rick said he'd
look
On Thursday 19 March 2009 18:02:26 Frank Cox wrote:
...
LV Name/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00
VG NameVolGroup00
LV UUIDyFemKc-s2bo-zZC0-cc7q-50By-4jQM-G1MsQr
...
Block device 253:0
--- Segments ---
Logical extent 0 to 8872:
On Thursday 19 March 2009 18:02:26 Frank Cox wrote:
...
LV Name/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00
VG NameVolGroup00
LV UUIDyFemKc-s2bo-zZC0-cc7q-50By-4jQM-G1MsQr
...
Block device 253:0
--- Segments ---
Logical extent 0 to 8872:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:24:14 +
Bill Crawford wrote:
You should probably be able to get some sense out of this by doing:
# vgrename 1dl8EY-s2Qe-W50Y-wU8V-nCRJ-5Upz-SEkJgp vg_sda2
[frank...@mutt temp]$ su -c vgrename 1dl8EY-s2Qe-W50Y-wU8V-nCRJ-5Upz-SEkJgp
vg_sda2 Password:
Volume
On Friday 20 March 2009 18:29:33 Frank Cox wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:24:14 +
Bill Crawford wrote:
You should probably be able to get some sense out of this by doing:
# vgrename 1dl8EY-s2Qe-W50Y-wU8V-nCRJ-5Upz-SEkJgp vg_sda2
[frank...@mutt temp]$ su -c vgrename
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Frank Cox thea...@sasktel.net wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:24:14 +
Bill Crawford wrote:
You should probably be able to get some sense out of this by doing:
# vgrename 1dl8EY-s2Qe-W50Y-wU8V-nCRJ-5Upz-SEkJgp vg_sda2
[frank...@mutt temp]$ su -c
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:50:31 +
Bill Crawford wrote:
You need to either temporarily pull sda2 out, and boot off a rescue disk to
rename it, or vice versa. Or find out the UUID of the volume ... if you're
lucky, vgdisplay --verbose *might* pick up the duplicate and show you the
UUID for
normally. Check the lvdisplay -vm again and
verify that now the extents are on sda2.
Sorry it's been such a pain, Frank. You'd think the LVM tools would
have options to handle this sort of thing, but they don't appear to or
I'm not smart enough to figure out what they are. I'm going to trawl
From: Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak m...@avtechpulse.com
Sent: Thursday, 2009, March 19 05:10
Frank Cox wrote:
It looks like the machine can see the second drive and the lvm that's on
it
/dev/sdb2, but it has the same VolGroup name as /dev/sda2.
Yes, this is common and annoying. Here
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:39 PM, jdow j...@earthlink.net wrote:
From: Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak m...@avtechpulse.com
Sent: Thursday, 2009, March 19 05:10
Frank Cox wrote:
It looks like the machine can see the second drive and the lvm that's on
it
/dev/sdb2, but it has the same VolGroup
Frank Cox wrote:
It looks like the machine can see the second drive and the lvm that's on it
/dev/sdb2, but it has the same VolGroup name as /dev/sda2.
Yes, this is common and annoying. Here is the guide that I followed when
it happened to me:
http://www.whoopis.com/howtos
On Thursday 19 March 2009 12:10:25 Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak wrote:
...
I filed bug 461682 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461682),
requesting that the default volume names not be so generic - they now
incorporate the hostname, so this problem should be much less common in
F11+.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 5:10 AM, Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak
m...@avtechpulse.com wrote:
Frank Cox wrote:
It looks like the machine can see the second drive and the lvm that's on
it
/dev/sdb2, but it has the same VolGroup name as /dev/sda2.
Yes, this is common and annoying. Here is the guide
Frank Cox wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:07:28 -0700
Rick Stevens wrote:
We have a serious conflict here. The df command shows you as on sda,
but LVM is reporting sdb. My gut reaction is to have you do a:
vgreduce --test VolGroup00 /dev/sdb2
and see if it would be successful. If so
On Thursday 19 March 2009 17:17:43 Rick Stevens wrote:
This is truly screwey. The pvscan shows sdb2 as part of VolGroup00,
lvdisplay shows the partition as in use, but vgreduce says sdb2 isn't
part of the VG. Hoo, boy.
Could someone post the output of lvdisplay --maps and of pvdisplay
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Rick Stevens ri...@nerd.com wrote:
This is truly screwey. The pvscan shows sdb2 as part of VolGroup00,
lvdisplay shows the partition as in use, but vgreduce says sdb2 isn't
part of the VG. Hoo, boy.
Frank, this is potentially dangerous, but you can try
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:47:53 +
Bill Crawford wrote:
Could someone post the output of lvdisplay --maps and of pvdisplay --maps ?
[r...@mutt ~]# lvdisplay --maps
--- Logical volume ---
LV Name/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00
VG NameVolGroup00
LV UUID
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Rick Stevens ri...@nerd.com wrote:
Frank Cox wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:07:28 -0700
Rick Stevens wrote:
We have a serious conflict here. The df command shows you as on sda,
but LVM is reporting sdb. My gut reaction is to have you do
Aldo Foot wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Rick Stevens ri...@nerd.com wrote:
Frank Cox wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:07:28 -0700
Rick Stevens wrote:
We have a serious conflict here. The df command shows you as on sda,
but LVM is reporting sdb. My gut reaction is to have you do
as on sda,
but LVM is reporting sdb. My gut reaction is to have you do a:
vgreduce --test VolGroup00 /dev/sdb2
and see if it would be successful. If so, then remove the --test and
cross your fingers.
[r...@mutt temp]# vgreduce --test VolGroup00 /dev/sdb2
Test mode: Metadata
main
desktop machine I'm not terribly anxious to just start playing around with
the lvm configuration without knowing what I'm doing.
Here are my findings so far:
[r...@mutt ~]# pvscan
PV /dev/sdb2 VG VolGroup00 lvm2 [279.25 GB / 32.00 MB free]
PV /dev/sda2 VG VolGroup00 lvm2 [465.56
On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 12:26 -0600, Frank Cox wrote:
At this point, since the second hard drive seems to be in good condition, I
think I would like to re-format it and either add it to the existing volume on
sda2 to make one big logical drive, or just reformat it and make a second lvm
: 0x5d7711f1
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 1 25 200781 83 Linux
/dev/sda2 26 60801 488183220 8e Linux LVM
Disk /dev/sdb: 300.0 GB, 300069052416 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 36481 cylinders
Units
/dev/sda2 26 60801 488183220 8e Linux LVM
Disk /dev/sdb: 300.0 GB, 300069052416 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 36481 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00041fa1
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
, it seems to me (not
being an LVM expert) from his output that he has a Volume Group (00)
that spans sda2 and sdb2, two LVs that are defined in the VG, both of
which sit on sdb2, but no LV defined on sda2. Is this unusual?
There also seems to be some confusion between Volume Group and
Volume (ie. LV
a second lvm
on it again and add it my directory tree. Which approach would be better?
And
how do I extend a lvm to cover both drives if that's what I end up doing?
How to use the disk is a matter of personal choice.
Using the second drive separately is simpler. You could create a
Volume
, and advice for using
Fedora.
Rick offered to post a summary afterwards. This LVM stuff can get tricky and
there could be a lot of posting back and forth.
Regarding the actual problem the OP seems to have, it seems to me (not
being an LVM expert) from his output that he has a Volume Group (00
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:43:26 -0700
Rick Stevens wrote:
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 * 1 25 200781 83 Linux
/dev/sdb2 26 36481 292832820 8e Linux LVM
Ah, HAH! Ok, do you want to run off
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
Dean S. Messing wrote:
Regarding the actual problem the OP seems to have, it seems to me (not
being an LVM expert) from his output that he has a Volume Group (00)
that spans sda2 and sdb2, two LVs that are defined in the VG, both of
which sit on sdb2
Frank Cox wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
Dean S. Messing wrote:
Regarding the actual problem the OP seems to have, it seems to me (not
being an LVM expert) from his output that he has a Volume Group (00)
that spans sda2 and sdb2, two LVs that are defined in the VG, both
Slip of the brain:
Well, being a researcher, I'd not do this, but rather figure out
exactly what's causing the funning remapping. But you may not be the
^^^ funny
curious type. :-)
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
Frank Cox wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
Dean S. Messing wrote:
Regarding the actual problem the OP seems to have, it seems to me (not
being an LVM expert) from his output that he has a Volume Group (00)
that spans sda2 and sdb2, two LVs that are defined in the VG, both
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:07:28 -0700
Rick Stevens wrote:
We have a serious conflict here. The df command shows you as on sda,
but LVM is reporting sdb. My gut reaction is to have you do a:
vgreduce --test VolGroup00 /dev/sdb2
and see if it would be successful. If so, then remove
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Frank Cox thea...@sasktel.net wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:07:28 -0700
Rick Stevens wrote:
We have a serious conflict here. The df command shows you as on sda,
but LVM is reporting sdb. My gut reaction is to have you do a:
vgreduce --test VolGroup00
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:43:44 -0700
Aldo Foot wrote:
Rename the VG on the sdb2 to something else other than VolGroup00.
vgrename VolGroup00 some_VG_name
Both of the VG's are named VolGroup00. There doesn't appear to be a way to
tell it to rename the VG on sdb2 and I don't know what
1 - 100 of 246 matches
Mail list logo
