From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LlDhi-0001EC-1p for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 02:46:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6141CE03FB; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 02:46:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453E4E03FB for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 02:46:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E8312F6FF5 for ; Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:46:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:46:24 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: RMcbeCm8SddJG49eUGanKW1Y97A8xwRdgZkzPWXVxtPJ 1237689983 Received: from [192.168.31.10] (cpe-024-211-156-075.nc.res.rr.com [24.211.156.75]) by www.fastmail.fm (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C63D62076C for ; Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:46:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] extending /usr partition... From: Albert Hopkins To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <34505.39356.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <49C52C76.4030609@gmail.com> <200903212012.57099.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <49C5344C.501@gmail.com> <20090321205755.662fb56a@krikkit.digimed.co.uk> <34505.39356.qm@web65409.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:46:22 -0400 Message-Id: <1237689982.6499.18.camel@blackwidow.nbk> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 8832f0f0-7c84-4356-a401-01d8af8a7545 X-Archives-Hash: 087753660e470c8886c3eb9ddb9421f1 On Sat, 2009-03-21 at 14:13 -0700, BRM wrote: > With all the words of LVM2 going on, I feel it is only appropriate to also mention the risk. > > On a desktop I had installed LVM2 considering that I did need to upgrade partitions every now and then and my previous solution was add another drive/partition and cross mount - e.g. like done with /usr/local under /usr, which worked fairly well. LVM2 worked great - until one of the drives crashed and I was trying to figure out what was on it. From that pov, volume management is a pain. I did figure out what I had mounted to it - but only after deconstructing the LVM configuration file to match it up with what I had put there. (And no, I had not yet gotten to doing an LVM soft-RAID solution to map a single LVM partition to two drives, which would certainly have helped.) I got my system working by adding a new drive that was not part of the volume group, and removing the old drives from the volume group. Fortunately, I had my volume setup so that they one partition was not made up of non-overlaping partitions on different drives. (e.g. partition A = > sda1 + sda2 instead of sda1 + sdb1.) > > So, unless you are looking to use LVM in a soft-RAID solution between multiple physical drives, not multiple partitions on the same drive, (e.g. partition A = sda1 + sda2, with mirror on sdb1+sdb2), then I would not suggest it as should anything happen, it'll make data recovery that much harder. > > Just 2 cents for the pot. With or without LVM if you lose a drive then you've lost the data on it. LVM does have the capability of assembling a partially damaged volume group just not a partially damaged logical volume which, when you think about it, makes sense. And you can also throw in the standard warning about backing up your data.