Running SLES9 for S/390 (31-bit) in an LPAR > (no VM) using a shared IFL Is there a "Howto" document for adding dasd to an existing LVM system volume group? /dev/system/home /home reiserfs acl,user_xattr 1 2 /dev/system/opt /opt reiserfs acl,user_xattr 1 2 /dev/system/var /var reiserfs acl,user_xattr 1 2 I would like to add 3 more mod3 devices to my system and extend the capacity of the /opt and /var filesystems. TIA Doug -----Original Message----- From: linux-lvm-request@redhat.com [mailto:linux-lvm-request@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 7:11 PM To: linux-lvm@redhat.com Subject: linux-lvm Digest, Vol 7, Issue 1 Send linux-lvm mailing list submissions to linux-lvm@redhat.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to linux-lvm-request@redhat.com You can reach the person managing the list at linux-lvm-owner@redhat.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of linux-lvm digest..." Today's Topics: 1. LVM2 and Software RAID (Yang, Daniel) 2. Re: LVM2 and Software RAID (Robin Green) 3. Re: LVM2 and Software RAID (Peter A. Castro) 4. LVM and Ghost (James P) 5. Re: LVM and Ghost (Luca Berra) 6. Re: LVM and Ghost (Clint Byrum) 7. Re: LVM and Ghost (rich turner) 8. Re: partition strategy (Arshavir Grigorian) 9. Unable to format certain volumes with lvm2 & reiserfs (Stephen Boulet) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:44:04 -0700 From: "Yang, Daniel" <dyang@tickets.com> Subject: LVM2 and Software RAID To: linux-lvm@redhat.com Message-ID: <63BAEF7DCB973A469B1A60CBE113C1650872A631@cmss-mail.Tickets.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" What information can you give on the reliability of using LVM2 w/ Software RAID? I've done some reading that stated that LVM and Software RAID on Linux is not a good combination. Especially b/c the combination does not allow for adding or removing hard drives. Also, LVM does not allow for mirroring capabilities so there is no way to mirror w/o the software RAID. Finally, the combination does not support bad-block replacement mechanisms. What can one do if a bad-block occurs in this type of setup? Thanks, DY -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /archives/linux-lvm/attachments/20040831/96c2b0dd/attachment.htm ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 16:22:34 +0100 From: Robin Green <greenrd@greenrd.org> Subject: Re: LVM2 and Software RAID To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20040901152234.GB4300@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 05:44:04PM -0700, Yang, Daniel wrote: > Finally, the combination does not support bad-block replacement > mechanisms. Bad block replacement has been implemented in hardware for years so this is not an issue. If you get a huge number of bad blocks you should really consider replacing the drive concerned. -- Robin Weblog: http://lrp.greenrd.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : /archives/linux-lvm/attachments/20040901/c173d2d9/attachment.bin ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 10:54:13 -0700 (PDT) From: "Peter A. Castro" <doctor@fruitbat.org> Subject: Re: LVM2 and Software RAID To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0409011018470.4635@ming.fruitbat.org> Content-Type: TEXT/Plain; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Yang, Daniel wrote: > What information can you give on the reliability of using LVM2 w/ > Software RAID? I've done some reading that stated that LVM and > Software RAID on Linux is not a good combination. Especially b/c the > combination does not allow for adding or removing hard drives. Also, > LVM does not allow for mirroring capabilities so there is no way to > mirror w/o the software RAID. Finally, the combination does not > support bad-block replacement mechanisms. What can one do if a > bad-block occurs in this type of setup? There are always pros and cons for using RAID and LVM. For my money, software raid is more flexible and more managable than hardware raid. Others may disagree, of course :) RAID is mostly about planning how you want your disks to be spliced together and what kind of reliability over failure you are willing to live with. This is true for software and hardware RAID. Most hardware RAID adapters do not allow for resizing an existing array. It is possible to resize a software RAID, but there is the potential for data loss. The Software-RAID HOWTO has a quick section on RAID resizing which might interested you. See: http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Software-RAID-HOWTO.html Software RAID, as you are aware, uses the computers processor to perform the raid functions, where as hardware RAID has a separate processor on the RAID adapter to perform these functions. If you have a sufficiently fast computer, the overhead of raid will hardly be noticed. LVM, by contrast, is geared for adding and removing physical drives from a volume group allowing one to add more storage or replace smaller drives with larger ones. The problem most people have is that they create one big raid array and thus have only one volume group with only one physical device in it. Kinda hard to remove a device and retain your data in this configuration :) Most modern drives have automatic bad-block replacement internally. If the drive has more bad-blocks than available replacement blocks, then likely the drive is header for failure anyways and should be replaced. Perhaps you should consider what you want to do with your arrays. If you expect to be needing to add more redundant storage over time, then perhaps a solution would be to create several small raid arrays on several drives. Each array appears as a single "drive" to the system. This way, you can group several "drives" together in a volume group. If you need to add storage, you simple replace one arrays' set of drives. With LVM, you can move data off of that "drive", remove it from the volume group, change out the physical drives, create the new array on these drives, then add it back into the volume group, or simply add new disks, create a new array and add it to the volume group. Again, it's all about planning. With Software RAID and LVM you have more flexibility, and the above can be done while the system is live. Most hardware raids have to be setup from the adapters bios. Good luck, whichever you choose. > Thanks, > DY -- Peter A. Castro <doctor@fruitbat.org> or <Peter.Castro@oracle.com> "Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:00:40 -0500 From: James P <superfueld@charter.net> Subject: LVM and Ghost To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com> Message-ID: <41360E48.3030709@charter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Some of our admins are running into trouble running Norton Ghost on our RHEL ES 3.0 boxes. Ghost claims it doesn't recognize what's on the disk so it just does a raw dump of the entire (36 Gig) disk. This offers practically zero compression, so we're getting ghost images that are many times larger than the amount of actual used space on the machine. The only difference I can think of between these machines and our other Linux boxes that ghost perfectly well is that these are using LVM. Is this causing the problem with Ghost? Has anyone else run into this? What can we do to get Ghost to recognize where the data is on the disk so we can get some sort of reasonably sized images? Anything? --James ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 20:21:20 +0200 From: Luca Berra <bluca@comedia.it> Subject: Re: LVM and Ghost To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20040901182120.GF7576@percy.comedia.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed do not hijack other people threads, that said, probably norton ghost does not understand lvm. you could look at Mondo Rescue (http://www.mondorescue.org/) L. On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 01:00:40PM -0500, James P wrote: >The only difference I can think of between these machines and our >other Linux boxes that ghost perfectly well is that these are using >LVM. Is this causing the problem with Ghost? Has anyone else run L. -- Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \ ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 11:24:56 -0700 From: Clint Byrum <cbyrum@spamaps.org> Subject: Re: LVM and Ghost To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1094063096.12875.46.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 11:00, James P wrote: > Some of our admins are running into trouble running Norton Ghost on > our RHEL ES 3.0 boxes. Ghost claims it doesn't recognize what's on > the disk so it just does a raw dump of the entire (36 Gig) disk. > This offers practically zero compression, so we're getting ghost > images that are many times larger than the amount of actual used > space on the machine. > > The only difference I can think of between these machines and our > other Linux boxes that ghost perfectly well is that these are using > LVM. Is this causing the problem with Ghost? Has anyone else run > into this? What can we do to get Ghost to recognize where the data > is on the disk so we can get some sort of reasonably sized images? > Anything? > Yes this is a Ghost problem. Ghost has no idea what LVM is. To it, LVM appears as an unknown filesystem. You'll have to ask symantec to add LVM support. Just curious.. why even use ghost with RH Linux servers? I suppose multicasting everything is nice.. but a two step process where you use a kickstart for the install, and then a multicast file copy program (like mcp, http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/kj234/mcp/) for any data would at least let you use free tools to accomplish your goal, and not leave you hanging when you switch filesystems. ;) ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 11:33:33 -0700 From: rich turner <rich@storix.com> Subject: Re: LVM and Ghost To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1094063612.3399.44.camel@rich> Content-Type: text/plain or you could look at Storix which definitely supports LVM. On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 11:21, Luca Berra wrote: > do not hijack other people threads, > that said, probably norton ghost does not understand lvm. > you could look at Mondo Rescue (http://www.mondorescue.org/) > > L. > On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 01:00:40PM -0500, James P wrote: > >The only difference I can think of between these machines and our > >other Linux boxes that ghost perfectly well is that these are using > >LVM. Is this causing the problem with Ghost? Has anyone else run > > L. ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:09:52 -0400 From: Arshavir Grigorian <ag@m-cam.com> Subject: Re: partition strategy To: linux-lvm@redhat.com Message-ID: <41363AA0.5030107@m-cam.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Arshavir Grigorian wrote: > Hi, > > This is my first post, so please bear with me. > > I have 2 free disk areas 230G and 231G. I hoping to take advantage of > RAID-0. > > Is it better to create 3 partitions 2 x230G + 1G - create a striped LV > over the first 2, then add the third to the volume group, then extend > the LV over to the new 1G extension (since LVM2 allows extending > striped lv-s). And if so, does the non-striped area get used as a last > resort (after the striped area is completely full)? > > OR > > Is it better to create 2 paritions 230G and 231G, put both in a vg, > create a striped lv and lvm will take care of striping to the 230G > mark, then writing linearly afterwards. > > TIA for any advice. > > > > Best, > > Arshavir > Hi, I mailed the above message about a week ago and there have not been any reponses. I am wondering whether there is a development list where I might have a better chance of getting an answer to my question (the HOWTO page did not mention any dev lists, so I am not sure). Many thanks. Arshavir ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 21:10:57 -0500 From: Stephen Boulet <stephen@theboulets.net> Subject: Unable to format certain volumes with lvm2 & reiserfs To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com> Message-ID: <200409012110.57955.stephen@theboulets.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I created some striped LVM2 volumes and I'm unable to format all but the first one. I did: << pvcreate /dev/sda5 pvcreate /dev/sdb5 vgcreate lvm2 /dev/sda5 /dev/sdb5 lvcreate -i2 -I4 -L100G -nhome lvm2 lvcreate -i2 -I4 -L20G -nusr lvm2 lvcreate -i2 -I4 -L10G -nopt lvm2 lvcreate -i2 -I4 -L10G -nvar lvm2 lvcreate -i2 -I4 -L5G -ntmp lvm2 >> Now I can do: mkreiserfs /dev/lvm2/home but trying the same thing on any of the other groups gives me: << # mkreiserfs -f /dev/lvm2/var mkreiserfs 3.6.18 (2003 www.namesys.com) [snip] Guessing about desired format.. Kernel 2.6.9-rc1 is running. reiserfs_create_journal: cannot create a journal of 8193 blocks with 18 offset on 4096 blocks >> However, ext3 works: << # mke2fs -j /dev/lvm2/opt mke2fs 1.35 (28-Feb-2004) Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=1024 (log=0) Fragment size=1024 (log=0) 4096 inodes, 16384 blocks 819 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=1 2 block groups 8192 blocks per group, 8192 fragments per group 2048 inodes per group Superblock backups stored on blocks: 8193 Writing inode tables: done Creating journal (1024 blocks): done Writing superblocks and filesystem accounting information: done This filesystem will be automatically checked every 27 mounts or 180 days, whichever comes first. Use tune2fs -c or -i to override. >> Did I do something wrong with the initial setup? -- Stephen If your desktop gets out of control easily, you probably have too much stuff on it that doesn't need to be there. Donna Smallin, "Unclutter Your Home" ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm End of linux-lvm Digest, Vol 7, Issue 1 *************************************** _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
