n?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9OThvS2Q3X3pWT3c
Decoder ring:
/dev/sdb is the relevant HDD in a USB enclosure
/dev/sdb1 is the only partition on it, LUKS
/dev/mapper/sdb is the unlocked LUKS device, which is also the PV in
question, and the only PV in the VG named "4vg"
--
n?id=0B_2Asp8DGjJ9OThvS2Q3X3pWT3c
Decoder ring:
/dev/sdb is the relevant HDD in a USB enclosure
/dev/sdb1 is the only partition on it, LUKS
/dev/mapper/sdb is the unlocked LUKS device, which is also the PV in
question, and the only PV in the VG named "4vg"
--
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 8:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:33 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>>>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Murphy writes:
>>
>> Chris> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:31 PM, John Stoffel
>> wrote:
>>>
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:33 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Murphy writes:
>
> Chris> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:31 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>>>
>>> Why don't you run quotas on your filesystems? Also, none of the
>>>
d then re-mount the filesystem.
Btrfs supports grow and shrink resizes only when mounted. It's not
possible to resize when unmounted.
--
Chris Murphy
___
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
r
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 12:41 PM, wrote:
> On 28.09.2018 18:59, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:57 AM, Zbigniew Kostrzewa
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have a question related to multiple snapshots of the same thin
u have literally two file systems that are
identical as far as the kernel is concerned. They have identical
volume UUIDs. I know XFS will refuse to mount a 2nd volume with the
same UUID as an already mounted file system; and while this can be
inhibited at mount time, I do not know the
ered. But that's speculation. Really we just
need more information on the storage stack, like a partition by
partition summary. If you get a successful boot, a sorted blkid (it
comes out unsorted by default) would be useful. And also if you can
figure out which d
aid1 over mirror segment type. It doesn't say that about raid0 vs
stripe segment type, maybe the two implementations aren't all that
different but anyway I would use raid0.
--
Chris Murphy
___
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://www.r
re, adding layers
increases complexity and thus risk. That's possibly a good idea in a
testing/qualification context, where you want something sensitive to
and consistently flags any discrepancy. That's not fragility.
--
Chris Murphy
___
linux-lvm mail
the LE to PE mapping, and it
should work. But does it work for both paging and hibernation files?
And what's the implication if the thin volume were to be snapshot?
Thanks,
--
Chris Murphy
___
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https
provisioning"
But I don't see that thread at:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/lvm-devel/2020-November/thread.html
Also, I have a reply on that thread from Danti Gionatan. That too is
not listed at redhat.com but is on lore. And it also came to me by
email directly from him, not from the list ser
al; that was kernel 5.8 through 5.11.
--
Chris Murphy
___
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
o the pool might comprise
many devices.
The same problem exists for Btrfs subvolumes, and ZFS datasets.
What might be possible and what is definitely not possible, is what
I'm interested in understanding for now.
Thanks,
--
Chris Murphy
___
linux-l
14 matches
Mail list logo
