On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 08:18:53AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 10:04:40PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 07:42:57AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 08:23:17PM -0400, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote: > > > > > > > This is a great reason to be using LVM with separate LVs. Need to > > > > convert? Create a new LV, make the new filesystem, tar the data over to > > > > it. When everything is working, delete the old LV. If you need extra > > > > space during the transition, borrow a drive and add it to the VG. > > > > > > What's the benefit of LVM when I add a separate drive? > > > > you can add the drive to the VG and then create more LV's to shuffle > > filesystems around to make the conversion possible. > > If I had a spare drive I would: > > 1. copy all data from the "problem" partition > 2. do the conversion (a reformat is no problem as everything is backed > up > 3. copy all data back > > Can you do it faster or easier with LVM? I'm just asking, never used > LVM.
not necessarily. And in fact, assuming the spare drive is large enough, then there is no need for LVM at all. in the corner cases it might make sense. Say you've got a large partition to do this conversion and your available drive isn't large enough, nor is the available space on the VG, then perhaps the two taken together are large enough, etc. but your point is totally valid. I think that doug is 1) a big fan of lvm and 2) has extra, unused space on his lvm array and can play around with this stuff. my server has a pretty significant amount of unused space at the moment and its great for stuff like this. Eventually, that "disk" (really 4 in raid5 with lvm over the top) will be full, i suppose, but its really convenient at the moment. A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
