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 <gentoo-user+bounces-121478-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Q8OP7-0007eh-Km
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 09 Apr 2011 03:00:05 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6109D1C004;
Sat, 9 Apr 2011 02:58:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 081781C004
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 02:58:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so5038952wyi.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 19:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:content-type;
bh=i4gu1RNqs+ZAjoKrOJir4ZE5MCBMLWzZt6odJutyrKQ=;
b=Hfz1QSixAbesNP0UPFayNPYGgUqOxP7g0lbbeomCw1FbM0bpzvtxIR9WDQzz3/49SI
UWJUTU6rgc8dD0XjEpzJ7ddjB/cN2qQzaja7lINvSNQiEyQfXG99/Kxlqwbv4/O2VVKN
wQgtpFGHvIf7bYAxZgJy28qMM3B9qIRaisDiE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:content-type;
b=qriOwiyh3ay7lBX/u0dO52j0LOBwxctLl0T7dS9KjzhPwojAXMVkBhLIY21UcCze/f
sj0ZPyhWPZSgA8CQR1EsZ6GTFqPOtT6phsiFoWt5F2q34l5GskOaDv23daaVLsklwVgZ
PJ4y/uigten9zhU/CaDZ6jJO1OZEtRGkcTWH0=
Received: by 10.227.12.13 with SMTP id v13mr2851878wbv.134.1302317917220; Fri,
08 Apr 2011 19:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.227.21.141 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 19:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4D9D9071.2050504@gmail.com>
References: <4D9D9071.2050504@gmail.com>
From: Mark Shields <laebshade@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 21:58:17 -0500
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=0SK87G-MCSPfWwQr8cVmJvzN8+A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] LVM for data drives but not the OS
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=002215974a76d7313104a0738494
X-Archives-Salt:
X-Archives-Hash: 0069da53eec60e2746ad14760fa84e3b
--002215974a76d7313104a0738494
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Quick question about LVM. I have a 750Gb drive that has miscellaneous
> stuff on it. Stuff likes videos, music, pictures, ISO files and a few other
> things. It's not full yet but it is working on it. I have my OS on sda.
> The large drive is on sdc. If I buy another drive it should be sdd. I
> think this is possible from what I have read but want to make sure. Could I
> put sdc and sdd on LVM but the OS remain as it is with LVM not involved at
> all? Basically, my OS stays just like it is and is not touched my LVM at
> all but the two larger drives are managed by LVM.
>
> 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.
>
> If there is a better solution to link two large drives, I'm open to those
> ideas as well. LVM is all I can think of is why I mention it.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)
>
>
I know I'm late to the game with a reply, but a couple of months ago, I
setup a data box running Gentoo in the following configuration:
OS drive: 250 GB PATA LVM2
data drives: 2 x WD Caviar Black 3 TB, raid1, LVM2
Had to partition those drives using parted, though.
If that setup works fine -- and it does -- you'll have no issues.
--002215974a76d7313104a0738494
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Dale <span dir=
=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com">rdalek1967@gmail.com</=
a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0=
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Hi,<br>
<br>
Quick question about LVM. =A0I have a 750Gb drive that has miscellaneous st=
uff on it. =A0Stuff likes videos, music, pictures, ISO files and a few othe=
r things. =A0It's not full yet but it is working on it. =A0I have my OS=
on sda. =A0The large drive is on sdc. =A0If I buy another drive it should =
be sdd. =A0I think this is possible from what I have read but want to make =
sure. =A0Could I put sdc and sdd on LVM but the OS remain as it is with LVM=
not involved at all? =A0Basically, my OS stays just like it is and is not =
touched my LVM at all but the two larger drives are managed by LVM.<br>
<br>
I want to do it this way because I don't trust LVM enough to put my OS =
on. =A0Just my personal opinion on LVM.<br>
<br>
If there is a better solution to link two large drives, I'm open to tho=
se ideas as well. =A0LVM is all I can think of is why I mention it.<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br><font color=3D"#888888">
<br>
Dale<br>
<br>
:-) =A0:-)<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br><div>I know I'm late to the game with a r=
eply, but a couple of months ago, I setup a data box running Gentoo in the =
following configuration:</div><div><br></div><div>OS drive: =A0250 GB PATA =
LVM2</div>
<div>data drives: =A02 x WD Caviar Black 3 TB, raid1, LVM2</div><div><br></=
div><div>Had to partition those drives using parted, though.</div><div><br>=
</div><div>If that setup works fine -- and it does -- you'll have no is=
sues.</div>
--002215974a76d7313104a0738494--