Good morning all,
I was having a little debate yesterday and I want to get the experts on this
list opinions.
What's the best practice when it comes to the root directory?
Is it acceptable and recommend to create an vgroot and lvroot so it is
expandable?
Or is it recommended to have the root
Hi Michael,
In our shop we use a normal directory to root, and create a VG for the
expandable directories. We usually have VG for /usr and /opt.
Our cloning scripts are happy with this setup, and we don't have much
headache when we have to link the root mdisk to another machine to
diagnostics.
Michael,
When you say 'root directory' I assume you mean / and not /root/.
FWIW, the only time we use LVMs is for application data or log files in
directories such as /opt/was/, /oradata/logs/ or something like that. We
used to use an LVM for /var/ but found we didn't need it.
We use about a 12
Yes I am referring to / yes. Is there any issues with using a vg or lv on /?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 23, 2016, at 08:39, Michael MacIsaac wrote:
>
> Michael,
>
> When you say 'root directory' I assume you mean / and not /root/.
>
> FWIW, the only time we use LVMs is for application data
Keep in mind that LVM's are unique to a Linux guest. If a volume is to be
mounted in another system then it can't when an LVM with the same name already
exists.
Our cloning procedures want to mount a new system in our maintenance Linux
guest. This means that the base system (at least /, /etc an
The experts also still debate this .. I myself see nothing wrong with
root in an LVM - others shudder in horror. There are pros and cons to both
approaches. For recovery - having a bootable LVM free Linux is a good
thing so you can mount other guests VG disks without worry of duplicate
VGs
>>> On 8/23/2016 at 08:18 AM, Michael Weiner wrote:
-snip-
> Is it acceptable and recommend to create an vgroot and lvroot so it is
> expandable?
It's acceptable, barely. I would never recommend it. It's caused me too much
grief over the years. When you get thrown into a rescue situation, t
I don't know if that changed but it used to be that zipl could safely boot from
LVM that was on only one physical volume. See this older discussion for details:
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-390%40vm.marist.edu/msg62491.html
Tomas
Tomas Pavelka
CA Technologies
Sr Software Engineer
CA CZ, s.
We have rhel5 with rootvg and rootlv. That caused us some grief when a root
password was lost and we "simply wanted to mount it on another system".
Not so fast there skippy, all the systems have rootvg/lv so we had to work
around that... (Not rocket science, but inconvenient)
Now, (upgrading to re
It depends on what you consider to be the bigger problem.
A) having to care upfront about what needs space where is hard. Make / one
huge logical volume and don't worry about space until you need more, then
just grow / online.
B) fixing a machine that won't boot is hard. When /'s contents are sme
10 matches
Mail list logo