> Did you allocate the new LV with the same number of extents on a VG with the same extent size? It should work perfectly, if so.
Ah, no, the target VG was a bit larger. Will try that next. I'm toasted for the evening, time to back off. Been sweating the client's delivery of their project beta, but that is at least 6 months behind schedule ... just don't want to be a part of their cluster %^$#^, I have my own to worry about. Thanks, will pick up tomorrow after I get some billing time in. Christopher G. Stach II wrote: > ----- "Ben M." <[email protected]> wrote: > >> What a mess that turned out to be. Hey, maybe it was your "awesome >> numbering" <ducking and running>. jk, probably because I forgot to >> take >> some meds today or something. > > Measure twice. Cut once. :) > >> Oh, the dd quit on me before complete. Is it okay making the target lv >> bigger than the source when I try it again or does it have to be >> exact? >> I need some extra disk space in that xen vm too. > > You can make it larger if you want. The partition table copied from the > source will only have the original size allocated. Did you allocate the new > LV with the same number of extents on a VG with the same extent size? It > should work perfectly, if so. > _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list [email protected] http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
