Rob Lines wrote:
> On Feb 4, 2008 3:16 PM, John R Pierce <pierce@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> with LVM, you could join several smaller logical
> drives, maybe 1TB each,
> into a single volume set, which could then contain
> various file systems.
>
>
> That looks like it may be the result. The main reason was to
> keep the amount of overhead and 'stuff' required to revive it
> in the event of a server issue to a minimum. That was one of
> the reasons for going with an enclosure that handles all the
> RAID internally and just presents to the server as a single
> drive. We had been trying to avoid LVM as we had run into
> problems using knoppix recovering it in the past.
>
> It looks like we will probably just end up breaking it up
> into smaller chunks unless I can find a way for the enclosure
> to use 512 sectors and still have greater than 2 tb volumes.
LVM is very well supported these days.
In fact I default on LVM for all my OS and external storage
configurations here as it provides for greater flexibility and
manageability then raw disks/partitions.
-Ross
______________________________________________________________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
