LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Linux - General (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/)
-   -   msdos partition table.... bad? ok? (understanding parted output) (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/msdos-partition-table-bad-ok-understanding-parted-output-805217/)

emailbuilder88 04-30-2010 02:40 PM
msdos partition table.... bad? ok? (understanding parted output)
 
Hello,

I am looking at a RHEL system built by a windows admin and parted output tells me the partition table is msdos format (I guess?). I am uncertain if this could be a problem (is it like formatting a disk in WinXP as old DOS format instead of NTFS? will it fail to support large files? or is this completely different?). Sorry if this should be in the newbie forum(?). Here is the parted output (I think the error about /dev/md0 is because that's the RAID 1 device - is that OK to ignore?):

Code:
parted -l
Error: Unable to open /dev/md0 - unrecognised disk label.               

Model: Compaq Smart Array (cpqarray)
Disk /dev/cciss/c0d0: 500GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number  Start  End    Size  Type    File system  Flags
 1      32.3kB  107MB  107MB  primary  ext3        boot
 2      107MB  500GB  500GB  primary              lvm

pixellany 04-30-2010 02:50 PM
Quote:
I am looking at a RHEL system built by a windows admin....
Say no more--you are in big trouble.....;)

Seriously (to the extent that's possible on Friday afternoon):
The format of the partition table is pretty much standard. If I am not mistaken in goes back to the earliest days of the "PC". (Which of course was synonymous with msdos.)

Assuming you are running on RHEL, please post the results of these commands (running as root):

fdisk -l
cat /etc/fstab
mount

emailbuilder88 04-30-2010 03:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953298)
Say no more--you are in big trouble.....;)
:)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953298)
Seriously (to the extent that's possible on Friday afternoon):
The format of the partition table is pretty much standard. If I am not mistaken in goes back to the earliest days of the "PC". (Which of course was synonymous with msdos.)
Ah, OK. So then most people see that? Good. I hadn't ever used parted, and now that I go do the same thing on some other systems, I see they are all "msdos". OK. Whew. (in fact, is there rhyme or reason to using parted versus fdisk, etc? Sorry this is a newbie question...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953298)
Assuming you are running on RHEL, please post the results of these commands (running as root):

fdisk -l
Code:
fdisk -l

Disk /dev/cciss/c0d0: 500.0 GB, 500074307584 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60797 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953298)
cat /etc/fstab
Code:
cat /etc/fstab
/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01 /                      ext3    defaults        1 1
LABEL=/boot            /boot                  ext3    defaults        1 2
tmpfs                  /dev/shm                tmpfs  defaults        0 0
devpts                  /dev/pts                devpts  gid=5,mode=620  0 0
sysfs                  /sys                    sysfs  defaults        0 0
proc                    /proc                  proc    defaults        0 0
/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 swap                    swap    defaults        0 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953298)
mount
Code:
mount
/dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol01 on / type ext3 (rw)
proc on /proc type proc (rw)
sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw)
devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620)
/dev/cciss/c0d0p1 on /boot type ext3 (rw)
tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw)
none on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw)
sunrpc on /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs type rpc_pipefs (rw)
THANK YOU for such a quick reply!

pixellany 04-30-2010 03:07 PM
OK--LVM

But it's on some kind of RAID?

parted shows partitions on /dev/cciss/c0d0, but fdisk does not? I'd check that again...

Do we know the physical configuration?---i.e. Do you know how many physical drives there are and whether there is in fact a RAID?

emailbuilder88 04-30-2010 03:09 PM
Although my specialty is certainly not linux partition management, it seems like this is a fairly standard setup, yeah? parted complains about /dev/md0, but nowhere else does it show up, so I assume parted just doesn't know about RAID setups.

If I'm correct, it looks like this is a 500GB drive that was just dumped into a LVM volume in its entirety (yikes). I'd like to partition it up a little bit; should I just resize the LVM volume and create a new LVM volume next to it and not worry about fdisk/parted to create physical partitions?

If I start messing with physical partitions or LVM volumes, will any changes I make get reflected automatically on the RAID 1 mirror in the machine?

Thanks again!

emailbuilder88 04-30-2010 03:11 PM
Oops, I replied too quickly. Didn't see your response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953313)
OK--LVM

But it's on some kind of RAID?
Yes, RAID 1, although I don't know much about the hardware (assuming it's not software RAID, maybe there's a way to figure that out?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953313)
parted shows partitions on /dev/cciss/c0d0, but fdisk does not? I'd check that again...
Hmmm, how would one go about that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953313)
Do we know the physical configuration?---i.e. Do you know how many physical drives there are and whether there is in fact a RAID?
Yes, it's supposedly set up with two 500GB hard disks in RAID 1.

THANK YOU!

emailbuilder88 04-30-2010 03:15 PM
Sorry, my fdisk output wasn't complete. It shows that same device:

Code:
fdisk -l

Disk /dev/cciss/c0d0: 500.0 GB, 500074307584 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60797 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

          Device Boot      Start        End      Blocks  Id  System
/dev/cciss/c0d0p1  *          1          13      104391  83  Linux
/dev/cciss/c0d0p2              14      60797  488247480  8e  Linux LVM

pixellany 04-30-2010 03:18 PM
That's a relief!!

So, you've got LVM on a RAID---is it working OK?

emailbuilder88 04-30-2010 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany (Post 3953325)
That's a relief!!

So, you've got LVM on a RAID---is it working OK?
Well, it's a brand new system, nothing much going on with it yet... but sure, it seems fine. Anything specific you are thinking or just wondering why I posted here? :-)

I'm just trying to size up this machine, make sure all is in order, and then figure out how to best partition the drive (see my earlier post on this thread).

pixellany 04-30-2010 03:45 PM
Don't read too much into my comment---I may have simply forgotten the original question.....;)

My only serious comment is that I don't like RAID or LVM---they just make me think too much. I also know how to do long division---kinda just one of those weird people.....;)

emailbuilder88 04-30-2010 03:53 PM
OK thank you! :)

I think it might be best to start a new thread with my partitioning questions with a more appropriate title.

Thanks again


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 AM.