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 1Q7otL-0002ur-VL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 13:04:56 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6EBB31C08C; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:03:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq2.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq2.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.34.165]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37AF71C0A8 for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:03:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.34.134] (helo=smtp3.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq2.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7ort-0004Zi-JL; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:03:25 +0200 Received: from 5353c7ed.cm-6-4d.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([83.83.199.237] helo=data.antarean.org) by smtp3.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7orr-0007wO-SA; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:03:23 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81AAD1EAE; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:03:35 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from data.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (data.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9IkNAoHhc4Qu; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:03:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eve.localnet (eve.lan.antarean.org [10.20.13.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33F9E1390; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:03:35 +0200 (CEST) From: Joost Roeleveld To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Cc: Dale Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:03:22 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/4.6 beta4 (Linux/2.6.36-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.6.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <4D9DB2F3.1080209@gmail.com> References: <4D9D9071.2050504@gmail.com> <20110407123930.0f4844e4@digimed.co.uk> <4D9DB2F3.1080209@gmail.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-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <20110407130335.81AAD1EAE@data.antarean.org> X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-ID: 1Q7orr-0007wO-SA X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-SpamCheck: geen spam, SpamAssassin (niet cached, score=0.549, vereist 5, BAYES_05 -0.50, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.98, TW_TB 0.08, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.01) X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-From: joost@antarean.org X-Spam-Status: No X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 0c51f3b2fc8a8bc9aea384b7948665a9 On Thursday 07 April 2011 07:49:55 Dale wrote: > Neil Bothwick wrote: > > On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 06:28:40 -0500, Dale wrote: > >>>> I want to do it this way because I don't trust LVM enough to put > >>>> my > >>>> OS on. Just my personal opinion on LVM. > >>> > >>> This doesn't make sense. Your OS can be reinstalled in an hour or > >>> two, > >>> your photos etc. are irreplaceable. > >> > >> It does to me. I want to keep things so that if there is a problem, I > >> know how to fix it or can at least get to a point that I can get help > >> on it. If LVM fails and I can't boot, then I loose everything on LVM > >> because I would have to reinstall from scratch. If it fails just on > >> my > >> data stuff, I can get help and fix it because I can still boot up and > >> get to my email program. > > > > We have these things called live CDs and webmail :P > > > > Bear in mind that LVM has been around for years. It is proven and > > reliable. Once setup, you don't have to touch it, so you can't break > > it. The least trustworthy part of your system remains the user. > > Since I have no experience with LVM, that is the part I am worried > about. If I knew everything you, Alan, Joost and others knew, I'd just > install everything on it and hope for the best. I'm concerned that if > something did go wrong and I couldn't get help, I'd loose everything. I > don't have any way to back up this much data. I hate webmail. I guess > I could but that would just get on my nerves something bad. GMails webmail isn't too bad, tbh :) I agree though, it's difficult to back up all the data and I have actually decided to only back-up a subset of what I have on the server. It also helps to have more then 1 system when something does go wrong. Even a small laptop (netbook-style) that can connect is of great help. I don't think I know everything, but I do tend to be lucky enough to be able to find the info I need online. Then again, internet usage is a bit more widespread where I live. > Why is it that whenever I think I have found a good drive that is in the > 1 to 2Tb range, it has awful reviews? Things like DOA, died after a few > hours, days or weeks of use. This has me concerned. I have yet to have > a drive go bad but are they making crap nowadays or what? Short answer: yes :) Long answer: the drives are getting a higher density the whole time which makes them more difficult to produce. Also, companies have found it's cheaper to offer free warranty-replacements then make more reliable drives in the first place. Never mind most people only have the computer running for a few hours a day. Not like some of us who have them running 24/7 :) I currently use WD's Green drives in my server and they do tend to be reliable as long as they can be kept decently cooled. -- Joost