On Saturday 09 April 2011 08:04:19 Dale wrote:
> Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > Nice :)
> >
> > Btw, instead of specifying "final" size after resizing, you can actually
> > tell it to "add" 20GB by doing:
> > lvrextend -L+20G /dev/sdb-vg/test
> >
> > --
> > Joost
>
> So that was what the howto meant
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Dale wrote:
>
> I think I am too. Since folks know I am disabled anyway, I went to the Dr
> the other day. The new meds aren't perfect but it is better. When I go
> back, he may change it to another med. He just wanted to try this first.
> It does sort of help
on 04/09/2011 04:33 PM Dale wrote the following:
>
> I'm just needing to find me a good LARGE drive to put in here. I'm
> checking out the reviews but it just seems most have issues.
>
> Thoughts?
>
I think you should be safe with WD1002FAEX, WD1502FAEX and WD2002FAEX.
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Saturday 09 April 2011 06:43:25 Dale wrote:
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 12:48 on Saturday 09 April 2011, Dale
did
opine thusly:
Yes.
PVs, VGs, LVs all have a concept of extend|resize|reduce. What that
means
depends on what you are wo
On Sat, 09 Apr 2011 08:00:49 -0500, Dale wrote:
> I wish it was like file system labels but I guess any clues is better
> than nothing.
It is like filesystem labels in that you can give VGs and LVs meaningful
names. You can use filesystem labels too, if you feel the need. A logical
volume is jus
Apparently, though unproven, at 13:43 on Saturday 09 April 2011, Dale did
opine thusly:
> So, when I get me a new drive, I use pvcreate to get it ready for LVM,
> then use vgextend to add it to the VG, then it is available for whatever
> LV I want to extend or to make a new LV?
Yup, that's rea
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
Nice :)
Btw, instead of specifying "final" size after resizing, you can actually tell
it to "add" 20GB by doing:
lvrextend -L+20G /dev/sdb-vg/test
--
Joost
So that was what the howto meant. If I know the total I need then I can
specify it but if I know the amou
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Friday 08 April 2011 16:30:03 Dale wrote:
The naming I was talking about was sort of like a label. I wanted to
use test, where I might use say data in real use, but ended up with this:
root@fireball / # df
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% M
On Saturday 09 April 2011 06:43:25 Dale wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 12:48 on Saturday 09 April 2011, Dale
> > did
> > opine thusly:
> > Yes.
> >
> > PVs, VGs, LVs all have a concept of extend|resize|reduce. What that
> > means
> > depends on what you are worki
On Saturday 09 April 2011 00:28:20 Dale wrote:
> OK. I learned something. Check this out:
>
> root@fireball / # df
> Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
> << SNIP >>
> /dev/mapper/sdb--vg-test
>51606140 48910048 74652 100% /mnt/temp
> r
On Friday 08 April 2011 16:30:03 Dale wrote:
> J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Fri, April 8, 2011 11:01 pm, Dale wrote:
> >> root@fireball / #
> >>
> >> I'm still trying to figure out how the naming part works tho. Now to
> >> mount it and put something on it. See if it works.
> >
> > Naming part, t
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 12:48 on Saturday 09 April 2011, Dale did
opine thusly:
Yes.
PVs, VGs, LVs all have a concept of extend|resize|reduce. What that means
depends on what you are working with, but they all make the thing bigger or
smaller.
For a PV it means the
Apparently, though unproven, at 12:48 on Saturday 09 April 2011, Dale did
opine thusly:
> > the new drive ready for LVM. What command adds it to the VG? Is it
> > vgcreate with some option? I was sort of looking for something like
> > vgadd or something but no luck finding that. Maybe I am
Dale wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:43:12 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
No matter how many drives you have, I doubt you'll need more than one
volume group.
...although I did find not long ago that a second VG for another,
temporary distro kept things tidy.. This is not to co
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:43:12 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
No matter how many drives you have, I doubt you'll need more than one
volume group.
...although I did find not long ago that a second VG for another,
temporary distro kept things tidy.. This is not to con
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 18:36:28 -0500, Dale wrote:
A little time saver, if you have only one VG, set $LVM_VG_NAME to its
name and you can leave the VG name out of any lv* commands.
I'll have more than one before long so may as well learn the long way.
Neat to
On Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:43:12 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > No matter how many drives you have, I doubt you'll need more than one
> > volume group.
>
> ...although I did find not long ago that a second VG for another,
> temporary distro kept things tidy.. This is not to contradict you
> though
On Saturday 09 April 2011 09:52:01 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> No matter how many drives you have, I doubt you'll need more than one
> volume group.
...although I did find not long ago that a second VG for another, temporary
distro kept things tidy.. This is not to contradict you though.
--
Rgds
Pe
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 18:36:28 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > A little time saver, if you have only one VG, set $LVM_VG_NAME to its
> > name and you can leave the VG name out of any lv* commands.
> I'll have more than one before long so may as well learn the long way.
> Neat to know tho. I'm hoping for
OK. I learned something. Check this out:
root@fireball / # df
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
<< SNIP >>
/dev/mapper/sdb--vg-test
51606140 48910048 74652 100% /mnt/temp
root@fireball / #
This is what I am doing here. As I posted a
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Dale 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 driv
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:23:20 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Cool so far. Now make a few more LVs (check the man pages, I'm doing
this from memory):
lvcreate -L 20G -n test2 sdb-vg
lvcreate -L 30G -n test3 sdb-vg
A little time saver, if you have only one VG, set $LVM
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:23:20 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Cool so far. Now make a few more LVs (check the man pages, I'm doing
> this from memory):
>
> lvcreate -L 20G -n test2 sdb-vg
> lvcreate -L 30G -n test3 sdb-vg
A little time saver, if you have only one VG, set $LVM_VG_NAME to its
name and
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 20:38:21 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > So when I get ready to make a file system, say ext3, then it would be
> > mkfs.ext3 /dev/mapper/. Then it would be ready to put
> > stuff on.
>
> Yup. You'll have to poke around /dev/ a bit to see how your udev does
> it today but you
J. Roeleveld wrote:
On Fri, April 8, 2011 11:01 pm, Dale wrote:
root@fireball / #
I'm still trying to figure out how the naming part works tho. Now to
mount it and put something on it. See if it works.
Naming part, there are 2 ways of finding it.
1: /dev//
2: /dev/mapper/-
You in
Apparently, though unproven, at 23:01 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine
thusly:
> Dale wrote:
> > root@fireball / # pvcreate /dev/sdb
> >
> > Physical volume "/dev/sdb" successfully created
> >
> > root@fireball / #
> >
> > Step one done. It didn't puke on my keyboard. lol
> >
> > N
On Fri, April 8, 2011 11:01 pm, Dale wrote:
> Dale wrote:
>>
>>
>> root@fireball / # pvcreate /dev/sdb
>> Physical volume "/dev/sdb" successfully created
>> root@fireball / #
>>
>> Step one done. It didn't puke on my keyboard. lol
>>
>> Now to see what else I can get into. Not going to put any
Dale wrote:
root@fireball / # pvcreate /dev/sdb
Physical volume "/dev/sdb" successfully created
root@fireball / #
Step one done. It didn't puke on my keyboard. lol
Now to see what else I can get into. Not going to put anything
important on it tho. Just a temporary thing right now. Jus
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:39 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine
thusly:
[snip]
Yea, I didn't type that in the way I meant it. PV is the bottom level,
then VG goes on top of that then the LV. I think I am typing that in
right. Basically, I create the P
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:39 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine
thusly:
[snip]
> Yea, I didn't type that in the way I meant it. PV is the bottom level,
> then VG goes on top of that then the LV. I think I am typing that in
> right. Basically, I create the PV first, then the VG
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:25 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine
thusly:
I'm going to give this a stab here. I go buy a new drive. I use cfdisk
to make it ready for LVM, the 8E thingy.
Yes
I then tell LVM to make it a
Physical Volume, either i
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:25 on Friday 08 April 2011, Dale did opine
thusly:
> I'm going to give this a stab here. I go buy a new drive. I use cfdisk
> to make it ready for LVM, the 8E thingy.
Yes
> I then tell LVM to make it a
> Physical Volume, either in whole or in part.
Yes
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Thursday 07 April 2011 08:57:40 Dale wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
I think Dale will probably succeed in breaking it :)
Dale, this comment isn't meant as an insult. I honestly think you
would
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Friday 08 April 2011 09:45:48 Dale wrote:
He tends to want to get away. That's where the slimy
part comes in. I'm not sure where you are from but in some parts of the
USA, some bright people do fish with their hands, usually very large
catfish too. I saw it on TV
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 15:50:03 +0200, Dale wrote about Re: [gentoo-user]
LVM for data drives but not the OS:
[snip]
>Ooooh. Still some progress tho. lol So, if I was going to use LVM,
>I create a partition first, either whole drive or part of it then use
>LVM on that?
You use pvcreate
On Friday 08 April 2011 09:45:48 Dale wrote:
> Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Friday 08 April 2011 08:40:18 Dale wrote:
> >> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > Yes. correct. Don't forget to set the partition type to "Linux LVM"
> > (8e).
>
> That would be
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Friday 08 April 2011 08:40:18 Dale wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote:
Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical
drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing
unpartitione
On Friday 08 April 2011 08:40:18 Dale wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote:
> >> Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical
> >> drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing
> >> unpartitioned.
> >
> > No. A physica
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:40 AM, Dale wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical
>>> drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing
>>> unpartitioned.
>>>
>>
>> No.
On Friday 08 April 2011 15:40:18 Dale wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote:
> >> Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical
> >> drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing
> >> unpartitioned.
> >
> > No. A physica
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote:
Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical
drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing
unpartitioned.
No. A physical volume is an area of disk. It can be the whole disk but it
On Friday 08 April 2011 05:42:59 Dale wrote:
> I been reading this howto:
>
> http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/index.html
>
> It hasn't been updated in several years now. Should I be reading this
> or is it up to date enough that I wont end up confused because of
> changes that have occurred
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:42:59 -0500, Dale wrote:
> Little light bulb here. physical volume is the same as a physical
> drive? If I understand it correctly, it is the whole thing
> unpartitioned.
No. A physical volume is an area of disk. It can be the whole disk but it
more usually a partition.
I been reading this howto:
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/index.html
It hasn't been updated in several years now. Should I be reading this
or is it up to date enough that I wont end up confused because of
changes that have occurred since that howto has been updated? I don't
want to le
On Thursday 07 April 2011 11:35:42 BRM wrote:
> - Original Message
>
> > From: J. Roeleveld
>
> I think the issue comes from the fact that LVM2 supports Mirroring without
> an underlying RAID controller:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3woh2d7
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_Volume_Manag
- Original Message
> From: J. Roeleveld
> On Thu, April 7, 2011 7:31 pm, BRM wrote:
> > The attraction to LVM for me was that from what I could tell it supported
> > and
> > implemented a software-RAID
> > so that I could help protect from disk-failure. I never got around to
> > confi
On Thursday 07 April 2011 14:21:33 Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> Dale, this comment isn't meant as an insult. I honestly think you would be
> perfect for some QA or Testing job :)
QA != Testing
QA is the features of a company organisation that give it the characteristic of
not introducing faults.
On Thu, April 7, 2011 7:31 pm, BRM wrote:
> - Original Message
>
>> From: Joost Roeleveld
>> On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:52:26 BRM wrote:
>> > - Original Message
>> >
>> > > From: Joost Roeleveld
>> > >
>> > > On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:20:55 BRM wrote:
>> > > > - Origi
- Original Message
> From: Joost Roeleveld
> On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:52:26 BRM wrote:
> > - Original Message
> >
> > > From: Joost Roeleveld
> > >
> > > On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:20:55 BRM wrote:
> > > > - Original Message
> > > >
> > > > > From: Neil Bo
On Thursday 07 April 2011 09:11:35 Dale wrote:
> Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Thursday 07 April 2011 15:41:00 Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> >> On Thursday 07 April 2011 14:31:43 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> I think Dale will probably succe
On Thursday 07 April 2011 08:57:40 Dale wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> >> I think Dale will probably succeed in breaking it :)
> >>
> >> Dale, this comment isn't meant as an insult. I honestly think you
> >> would
> >> be perfect for
On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:52:26 BRM wrote:
> - Original Message
>
> > From: Joost Roeleveld
> >
> > On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:20:55 BRM wrote:
> > > - Original Message
> > >
> > > > From: Neil Bothwick
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:22:41 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Thursday 07 April 2011 15:41:00 Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Thursday 07 April 2011 14:31:43 Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
I think Dale will probably succeed in breaking it :)
Dale, this comment isn't m
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
I think Dale will probably succeed in breaking it :)
Dale, this comment isn't meant as an insult. I honestly think you would
be perfect for some QA or Testing job :)
But not on any project you wanted to
- Original Message
> From: Joost Roeleveld
> On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:20:55 BRM wrote:
> > - Original Message
> > > From: Neil Bothwick
> > > On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:22:41 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > > > I want to do it this way because I don't trust LVM enough to put my
> >
On Thursday 07 April 2011 15:41:00 Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> On Thursday 07 April 2011 14:31:43 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > > I think Dale will probably succeed in breaking it :)
> > >
> > > Dale, this comment isn't meant as an insult. I h
On Thursday 07 April 2011 14:31:43 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > I think Dale will probably succeed in breaking it :)
> >
> > Dale, this comment isn't meant as an insult. I honestly think you would
> > be perfect for some QA or Testing job :)
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:21:33 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> I think Dale will probably succeed in breaking it :)
>
> Dale, this comment isn't meant as an insult. I honestly think you would
> be perfect for some QA or Testing job :)
But not on any project you wanted to finish on time ;-)
--
N
On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:20:55 BRM wrote:
> - Original Message
>
> > From: Neil Bothwick
> >
> > On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:22:41 -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.
> >
> >
On Thursday 07 April 2011 14:04:05 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 07:49:55 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > > 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 s
- Original Message
> From: Neil Bothwick
> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:22:41 -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,
> y
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 07:49:55 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > 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,
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 c
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 irreplace
Gregory Shearman wrote:
In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:22:41 -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. Yo
In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:22:41 -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
On Thursday 07 April 2011 06:12:40 Dale wrote:
> Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Thursday 07 April 2011 05:22:41 Dale wrote:
> > You will need to do it in the following steps though:
> > - create PV, LVM and LV on the new drive
> > - copy data over
> > - create PV on old drive and add it to LVM
> > C
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.
> >
Dale writes:
> 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
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:22:41 -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.
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:22:41 -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.
--
Neil Bothwick
Advance
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Thursday 07 April 2011 05:22:41 Dale 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
On Thursday 07 April 2011 05:22:41 Dale 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 dr
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
sd
74 matches
Mail list logo
