Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
This is similar to how I set up my servers in my office where I have 2 300GB and 5 72GB SCSI drives. Your comment about naming the volume groups is well taken. When I first set things up, I didn't do that and it created a bunch of problems for me when I wanted to move things around. However, you can easily rename volume groups and logical volumes but not while mounted. The way I have things set up now is: /dev/sda1 /dev/sda2 LVM Root and swap are on a dedicated 72GB on all my servers. This allows me to physically move everything to any of the 6 X86_64 servers we have. it also makes it a lot easier for us to upgrade to the current version of the OS supported by our company for development. On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:05:56 -0400 John Abreau <[hidden email]> wrote: > My preferred partitioning, without Windows, is > > /dev/md0 /boot > /dev/md1 LVM > > where both md devices are RAID-1 devices spanning two > identical drives. Then when I create the volume group, > I give it a unique name based on the server's hostname, > to avoid naming conflicts if I ever need to put the disks > in a different machine for emergency maintenance, > and name each volume for its purpose, e.g. "root' for /, > "var' for /var, "swap" for the swap volume, etc. > > When I create the volumes, I set their sizes failry small, > and then grow them as needed, so i don't end up wasting > space in one filesystem while running out on another. > > As the system's storage needs grow, I can add additional > RAID-1 sets to the volume group, or I can upgrade to > larger drives by adding the larger RAID-1 volume, > pvmove'ing everything off the smaller volume, and > removing the smaller volume from the volume group. > I did this a few months ago to upgrade one of the BLU > servers from a single 80 GB drive to a RAID-1 pair of > 750 GB drives, and the process went smoothly. > > > > Jerry Feldman wrote: > > The subject of partitioning comes up every once in a while. > > Generally on my systems at home, I create an extended partition in the > > first primary, and create root, home, and possibly /usr/local. At work, > > I've been using LVM. For installfests, I generally shrink down the > > Windows partition and create an extended in one of the remaining > > primaries. (Windows usually takes up 2 partitions one for Windows, and > > another for restores). > > > > I generally don't bother with a dedicated /boot partition, but thee are > > some pros and cons. The /boot partition cannot be part of LVM so on LVM > > installations you need /boot as a separate partition. In any cases > > there are a number of pros and cons regarding the use of a separate > > partition for /boot. One of the major reasons for /boot is that the > > GRUB stage 2 must be within the first 1024 cylinders because of the > > limitations of the MBR. > > > > Currently, as technology moves forward and disks become faster and more > > dense we are still locked to the old technology: > > > > 4 Primary partitions - this is a physical limitation of the partition > > table. > > > > A maximum of 16 logical partitions. I'm not sure if this is a > > limitation imposed by libata or by Windows. I've never been constrained > > by this. > > > > At this time, I'm just starting another discussion of how people > > partition their home systems. There are a lot of other factors that > > affect how systems are going to be used at work and is beyond the scope > > here. > > > > So, here is my preferred partitioning scheme with no Windows(either > > sda or hda: > > /dev/sda1 Extended > > /dev/sda5 Logical / (root) > > /dev/sda6 Swap > > /dev/sda7 Logical /home > > On my 160G HD I also have an additional partition whee I keep > > downloads, and ISOs. Currently, I don't use a separate /usr/local since > > I would prefer to rebuild or reinstall the stuff I use in /usr/local. > > > > In a typical Windows XP or Vista installation at installfests. > > Additionally, I either use the Windows resize utility to resize the > > partition, QTPated or GNU Parted. I do not use the Distribution's > > partitioning. My procedure is to first reduce the size of the Windows > > C: partition, then immediately boot into Windows to make sure > > everything works. This way I have a reasonably good chance that the > > Linux install does not damage Windows. I then edit /boot/menu.lst to > > delete the second Windows boot entry pointing to the D: partition. > > > > /dev/sda1 Primary NTFS Windows C: > > Defragged and > > reduced. > > /dev/sda2 Primary NTFS Windows D: > > Normally hidden > > /dev/sda3 Extended > > /dev/sda5 Logical / (root) > > /dev/sda6 Swap > > /dev/sda7 Logical /home > > These days I generally use ext3 since SuSE has pretty much forsaken > > ReiserFS. > > > > > > -- > > Jerry Feldman <[hidden email]> > > Boston Linux and Unix > > PGP key id: 537C5846 > > PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [hidden email] > > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > -- > John Abreau > IT Manager > Zuken USA > 238 Littleton Rd., Suite 100 > Westford, MA 01886 > T: 978-392-1777 F: 978-692-4725 > M: 978-764-8934 > E: [hidden email] W: www.zuken.com > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. >
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |