Re: [linux-lvm] Power loss consistency for RAID

but if a RAID got lost, you can always ask to https://www.RecuperoDatiRAIDFasTec.it which is the unique data recovery company that has flat rates for raid recovery starting from 150,00 euro per disk or the other way round, 900 euro for immediate/emergency recovery   Messaggio

Re: [linux-lvm] Power loss consistency for RAID

it is automatic though you should avoid power losses as better as you can with online PSU against line interactive ones ( which are good for consumer PCs and displays)   Messaggio originale   Da: lv.zheng.2...@gmail.com Inviato: 18 marzo 2019 10:05 A: linux-lvm@redhat.com

Re: [linux-lvm] Best way to run LVM over multiple SW RAIDs?

Did you thought about RAID 50 ?   Messaggio originale   Da: mator...@gmail.com Inviato: 7 dicembre 2019 17:17 A: linux-lvm@redhat.com Rispondi a: linux-lvm@redhat.com Oggetto: Re: [linux-lvm] Best way to run LVM over multiple SW RAIDs? On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 12:14 PM Daniel Janzon wrote:

Re: [linux-lvm] Replace Drive in RAID6

If you can't for some reasons succeed we @ https://www.RecuperoDatiRAIDFAsTec.it can recover it with very low flat rates BEWARE if one drive went failed and ALL the drives have the same age nothing can guarantee that none of the other drives is worn too the HINT is to clone all the drives as

Re: [linux-lvm] Can I combine LUKS and LVM to achieve encryption and snapshots?

What an awful idea to encrypt data on an hardware accelerator SSD is everything but an affordable storage for keeping safely your data and as soon some cells will fail , and with LVM , the first ones will be where LVM tables are sitting (and being heavily modified) .. you'll loose ALL the

[linux-lvm] LVM2 Metadata structure, extents ordering, metadata corruptions

Dear friends of the LVM mailing list I suppose this question is for some real LVM2 guru or even developer Here I kindly make three question with three premises premises 1. I'm a total noob about LVM2 low level logic, so I'm sorry of the questions will sound silly :-) 2. The following applies to

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM2 : performance drop even after deleting the snapshot

TIP and HINT forget SSDs with LVM unless of enterprise level especially if you are going to use/implement the thin provisioning How to identify an SSD of enterprise level: it costs from 1,00 euro per gigabyte up to 1,50 euro per gigabyte Kind regards Roberto Gini Technical Manager @

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM2 Metadata structure, extents ordering, metadata corruptions

Thank you for all the details and for your kind replies I will have a look to the utilities you kindly pointed out Kind regards Il giorno 29 set 2022, 13:41, alle ore 13:41, Zdenek Kabelac ha scritto: >Dne 29. 09. 22 v 13:15 Roberto Fastec napsal(a): >> Hello Zdenek >

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM2 Metadata structure, extents ordering, metadata corruptions

9 set 2022, 12:52, alle ore 12:52, Zdenek Kabelac ha scritto: >Dne 27. 09. 22 v 12:10 Roberto Fastec napsal(a): >> Dear friends of the LVM mailing list >> >> I suppose this question is for some real LVM2 guru or even developer >> >> Here I kindly make three questi

Re: [linux-lvm] bug? shrink lv by specifying pv extent to be removed does not behave as expected

"but shouldn't we perhaps leave it up to the end user / owner of the hardware,  to decide when it's ready for the recycle bin ?" with hard drives (forget SSDs, they are hardware accelerators absolutely unaffordable for data storing) it is not the user/owner that decide it , unless he doesn't

Re: [linux-lvm] bug? shrink lv by specifying pv extent to be removed does not behave as expected

P.S. needless to be said, that they eventually can reassemble damaged LVM , until LVM's metadata tables are still good enough Il giorno 12 apr 2023, 08:39, alle ore 08:39, Roland ha scritto: > >Controllers remap blocks all on their own and the so-called geometry >is entirely fictitious anyway

Re: [linux-lvm] bug? shrink lv by specifying pv extent to be removed does not behave as expected

Zdenek is right But if in this exact moment one or more drive do have not only bad sectors "reallocated" but also "pending" ones the best choice is to preserve them shutting them off and allowing a PRO cloning process with machines like PC-3000 But first at a PRO lab, they will open the

Re: [linux-lvm] bug? shrink lv by specifying pv extent to be removed does not behave as expected

If you are in trouble with the disks set because of bad healthiness of the drives they helped me with really convenient fee-per-disk in Verona , Italy It is the most well reputate (checked and compared with Google reviews) data recovery lab in Italy. If you want the reference, just drop me an

Re: [linux-lvm] Documentation about allowing >2 disk failures?

Hello Tim LVM is a sort of layer and it can reside on any substrate So go for raid 60 and avoid using too many drives for each RAID 6 Ideally I would use maximum  6x drives for each RAID 6 to next be stack on RAID 10 with the others bear in  mind that there is a calculation about guaranteed

Re: [linux-lvm] badblocks

Wrong approach Bad drives , cause ancient, are going to die so fast Cloning them software will kill them faster that above You should send the drive to a data recovery lab where they have Atola or  PC-3000 devices and will clone the drive in an hardware manner Best solution I know is