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 1Nxz98-0000gz-8Q for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 08:56:02 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3CD45E08FA; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 08:55:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f211.google.com (mail-bw0-f211.google.com [209.85.218.211]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F04F3E08FA for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 08:55:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz3 with SMTP id 3so2011218bwz.11 for ; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 01:55:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=hYRduWiHorkQBYp64L5c/p3n4Qcg68LZC5IMZLF+k5s=; b=BVBRBeitzr1yDOEiLGGNzbE0HKqBaO913RPYiXqX2M6Saea3bWd/Qha7Zm6/uHwORT fd4IV9spPfWEe1GCFlMq0UclE7Jsxc3PFCNxeFo4rxDRtsMEVVAKnC8QbiBO18DSsftG Pg9sZ2ZxErLRMMU+li/7Qd18oqh6DoGDx9eaA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=ob298exJ5xohgtZQeo6NG6uEjK5gZ9YF5Rg7ZA0q+2YfokKXpse3uFBUC9nyUDsmrC E5S87NqKZaEx+beQks4Q+exsAFokrlT5jkFJvCLyU0oWOvdH95/ECvrvU9/A86/atiq3 SSf12k9MVYGgdaDFHiEFprLKVAFYZuZIagBQ8= Received: by 10.204.47.153 with SMTP id n25mr3759954bkf.199.1270284939295; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 01:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nazgul.localnet (196-210-153-170-rrdg-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za [196.210.153.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a11sm85436669bkc.9.2010.04.03.01.55.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 03 Apr 2010 01:55:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] OT:Choosing a filesystem Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 10:52:22 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.1 (Linux/2.6.33-zen1; KDE/4.4.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Volker Armin Hemmann References: <20100401174711.GA5120@solfire> <20100402121238.GE28931@solfire> <201004021445.29441.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <201004021445.29441.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> 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 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201004031052.23070.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: a4f4200d-7fa5-4e6d-82a2-d23ec0d2437a X-Archives-Hash: f3c67a6a80ad5b215ecc4ec1dd09a21d On Friday 02 April 2010 14:45:29 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > On Freitag 02 April 2010, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote: > > Neil Bothwick [10-04-02 14:08]: > > > On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 13:04:53 +0200, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote: > > > > only to be sure to have understood everything correctly: > > > > Suggestion is to create for example one root partition and a swap > > > > partion. And I will create on big "rest of the disk"-partition. > > > > The last one will be subdivided with LVM into portions as needed. > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > Since the last big partition is big due to physical reasons (not for > > > > logical one): What will happen, if -- for example -- one portion will > > > > be not unmounted cleanly and while booting/checking fails to recover? > > > > Are all others damaged/lost? > > > > > > No, because the failure you describe is at the filesystem level. Even > > > the volume containing that filesystem will retain integrity, only the > > > filesystem itself will be corrupted. As you have left free space on > > > the volume group, you can just create a new volume, format it and copy > > > over everything you can recover from the broken filesystem before > > > deleting it. > > > > Hi Neil, > > > > yes, sounds good, very good. > > Last question: How heavy is the performance impact of such a setup ? > > seriously lvm sounds nice. But it isn't. It easily breaks. Can you back that up with some facts? I use LVM on many machines and have never had it breaks. I'm also quite ruthless on some machines with how I use it - manipulating volumes with apparently gay abandon. I attribute this lack of failure to me understanding how LVm works and using it as designed, without trying to be cute and/or clever. > You want a save setup? Go raid5 or raid6. As a bonus - you can get more > space if you need it by just adding another disk. And you are not > depending on some complex stuff to get it working. The various raid levels do not address the problem that LVM solves - how to rapidly create and manipulate sub-volumes. If your /var/log fills up, how would you add an extra 10G to it to gain breathing space without using something LVM-like (evms is for example LVM-like. So are the native HP-UX tools)? -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com