On Jan 21, 2005, at 3:40 PM, David Boyes wrote:
What I use is:
1) / as ext2 or ext3 (depending on distribution and platform -- usually
ext2 on zSeries)
2) all other filesystems as ext3
3) if a file system needs to be bigger than a physical volume, then use
LVM and create ext3 filesystems on the
On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 16:02 -0500, Mrohs, Ray wrote:
My rule-of-thumb is to only use LVM when it's necessary, as in providing more
file system space than one minidisk can provide.
There is also some striping value, no? (At least until Linux supports
PAV.)
--
David Andrews
A. Duda and Sons,
Administration
U.S. Department of Energy
-Original Message-
From: David Andrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 8:50 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 16:02 -0500, Mrohs, Ray wrote:
My rule-of-thumb
: Monday, January 24, 2005 9:41 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Striping does give you more paths into storage, but I haven't seen any
performance studies of striped vs. non-striped LVM disks. If you have
fast
hardware and FICON, the advantage
: Monday, January 24, 2005 9:41 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Striping does give you more paths into storage, but I haven't seen any
performance studies of striped vs. non-striped LVM disks. If
you have fast
hardware and FICON
@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
If you use LVM without striping, and Reiser FS on top of that, you don't
even have to unmount the filesystems to resize them.
Striping takes away ALL of this advantage. We ran some tests with
striped vs. non-striped filesystems
: Re: [LINUX-390] Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
How come in LVM without striping, with Reiser FS you can resize
filesystems without unmounting them? I'm just curious.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Hall, Ken (IDS DCS
The one caveat I'd lay out is: DON'T.
There are only a couple of arguments pro, and zillions of arguments con.
The con argument that carries the most weight with me is that you can
recover from most any other disk disaster _except_ the corruption of your
root device.
As has been suggested, I
Anyone have experiences moving root file system to Logical Volume
Manager (LVM)?
We run SLES8 under VM on S390 with Linux guests cloned from a 2-dasd
(3390mod3's) linux image with / on one pack and /usr on the other
pack.
I'd like more flexibility to use the free disk space from each pack as a
-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
01/21/2005 09:04 AM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Anyone have experiences moving root file system to Logical Volume
Manager (LVM)?
We run SLES8 under VM on S390
On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 11:12, Ranga Nathan wrote:
I had problems moving root file system to LVM. It has to be done with a
lot of care. However, if you move /home /var /local /opt etc to LVM, then
there is much less reason for moving root fs to LVM. That is what I did.
We run SLES9. I used Yast
: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Romanowski, John (OFT)
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:05 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Anyone have experiences moving root file system to Logical Volume Manager
(LVM)?
We run SLES8
]
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
01/21/2005 09:04 AM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Anyone have experiences moving root file system to Logical Volume
Manager (LVM
Post, Mark K wrote:
Don't do it. Keep your root file system as plain vanilla ext3, and move
other things to LVM (using ext3 as well):
/home
/opt
/tmp
/usr
/var
You really, really, don't want to have to fix LVM to get your system up an
running if it ever comes to that.
Mark Post
Agreed. When we
At IPL how will the Suse initrd find the Volume group and mount the root
file system?
I don't think it can. We boot from a 100 cyl /boot fs and have a logical
volume mounted over /. Maybe the easiest way is to try this type of
migration is to play tricks with minidisks:
- Shut down the Linux to
I have done this on a fresh install.
/boot was it's own filesystem
/ was in lvm vgwhatever
SUSE appends LVM to the /etc/sysconfig/modules so that the lvm module is
available in the initial ramd.
HTH
Wh
Michael MacIsaac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At IPL how will the Suse initrd find the Volume
, 2005 12:40 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Is it true, note that I haven't tried it, that if you try to use LVM for
everything, you still need a /boot volume, just a few cylinders, for IPL
purposes? I'm thinking that LVM is a software raid, so
: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Post, Mark K
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:39 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Don't do it. Keep your root file system as plain vanilla ext3, and move
other things to LVM (using ext3
But if LVM is so hard to fix then why use LVM even for /home,
/opt, etc?
Because LVM is necessary to allow those file systems to be larger than a
single physical volume, and those filesystems are not usually critical
during early stages of the boot process where things are still a little
Administration
U.S. Department of Energy
-Original Message-
From: Romanowski, John (OFT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:05 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Anyone have experiences moving root file system to Logical
PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
My rule-of-thumb is to only use LVM when it's necessary, as in providing
more
file system space than one minidisk can provide. I put /temp, /var, etc.
on their
own minidisks so that errant processes cannot
@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
But if LVM is so hard to fix then why use LVM even for /home,
/opt, etc?
Because LVM is necessary to allow those file systems to be larger than a
single physical volume, and those filesystems are not usually critical
during early
Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Romanowski, John (OFT)
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 4:18 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
I forgot to mention in my original question that /boot wouldn't be in LVM,
it'd be an ordinary partition
I forgot to mention in my original question that /boot wouldn't be in
LVM, it'd be an ordinary partition.
On a separate minidisk, I hope. 8-)
Thank you for pointing out the fsck time consideration. Doesn't having
ext3 fs reduce the fsck time?
Depends if you have ext3 built into the kernel.
@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
-snip-
3) if a file system needs to be bigger than a physical volume, then use LVM
and create ext3 filesystems on the logical volumes created by LVM.
--
For LINUX-390
PROTECTED]
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
01/21/2005 01:59 PM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
On Jan 21, 2005, at 3:40 PM, David Boyes wrote:
1) / as ext2
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Any caveats moving root filesystem to LVM?
Why would it be? We're talking about LVM versus non-LVM, not file
systems.
I got the impression that one should prefer ext2/ext3 for the root file
27 matches
Mail list logo
