Re: [gentoo-user] lvm problem -- is timing?

[Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1215 bytes --]

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:09:52 -0600, Maxim Wexler wrote:

> >> Necessary? Don't know but is meant to spare the SSD too much r/w
> >> strain.  
> >
> > How? By spanning an LVM across the two, you have no control over
> > which is written to the most. I'd put / on the SSD then mount
> > write-heavy directories, like /var and /home, on the SD card. I'd
> > also set $PORTDIR to /var/portage (/usr is a daft place to put the
> > portage tree anyway).  
> 
> That's what I have, I think,  sda1 is /boot approx 50M , sda2 is /
> approx 1G,  then the rest of the SSD is spanned with the SD card,
> approx 11G, and committed to /usr /home /opt /var and /tmp just as in
> the gentoo doc LVM2.

How does that spare the SSD when frequently written directories,
like /var and /usr/portage on partially on the SSD? If you want to keep
them off the SSD, you must not use LVM like this.

Forget LVM, forget a separate /boot, just stick / on the SSD and mount
the likes of /var on the SD card. I use LVM on my Eee, but that's because
it has two SSDs, I wouldn't dream of including the SD card in there.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

C&W music backward: get yer dog, wife, job, truck, kids, and sobriety
back.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]