On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 09:15:33AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Right, but I'm trying to decide if I should put / on LVM. > > To summarize what I've heard so far: > > Advantage: Able to resize.
Which is a negligible advantage. How often is the need for this? Disk space for / varies between 100Mb to 500Mb on my machines. Instal with a generous 2Gb for / only and you "never" need to worry about it filling up. > Disadvantages: > - Grub doesn't support LVM so need /boot on a regular > partition. > > - Difficult or impossible to boot up a rescue CD and > rescue a corrupted root fs. [snip] > Would there be any disadvantage to this? / is to valuable to lose. IMHO a single disk setup is a no go. Just to add my 2cents: new machines get (multiple (identical) disks with) 2 partitions on them: 1 - a small 2Gb (type fd) 2 - the rest (type fd) The small partitions are combined in a md0 array raid1, the others in whatever you like (most likely 5, 1 otherwise) md1 array. /dev/md0 will be used for /. /dev/md1 will be a pv for lvm. This adds redundancy, plus any of the partition that make up the raid1 for / can be mounted on its own (but writing to one will break the array). Adding a disk creates an other copy of /, and with the newer kernels a raid5 array can be expanded, so it can be used by the LVM. But this still creates a static sized /, which IMHO is no problem IF the initial size is big enough. -- When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. Daniel Tryba -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
