LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 01-21-2015, 02:50 PM   #1
dorlack
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2009
Location: Cambridge MA
Distribution: Any Linux
Posts: 122

Rep: Reputation: 2
doesn't contain a valid partition table? Working for months...


Everything is working great on this server, however I am seeing Disk doesn't contain a valid partition table. I have no issue reading and writing, this something that can be ignored?


Disk /dev/xvda: 32.2 GB, 32212254720 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 3916 cylinders, total 62914560 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/xvda1 * 16065 62910539 31447237+ 83 Linux

Disk /dev/xvdf: 1099.5 GB, 1099511627776 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 133674 cylinders, total 2147483648 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/xvdf doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/xvdh: 1099.5 GB, 1099511627776 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 133674 cylinders, total 2147483648 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/xvdh doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/xvdg: 1099.5 GB, 1099511627776 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 133674 cylinders, total 2147483648 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/xvdg doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/xvdi: 1099.5 GB, 1099511627776 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 133674 cylinders, total 2147483648 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/xvdi doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/mapper/vgebs-lvebs: 4398.0 GB, 4398029733888 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 534696 cylinders, total 8589901824 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 2097152 bytes / 4194304 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/mapper/vgebs-lvebs doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/xvdj: 32.2 GB, 32212254720 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 3916 cylinders, total 62914560 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/xvdj doesn't contain a valid partition table
 
Old 01-21-2015, 03:50 PM   #2
smallpond
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Distribution: CentOS 6 (pre-systemd)
Posts: 2,609

Rep: Reputation: 702Reputation: 702Reputation: 702Reputation: 702Reputation: 702Reputation: 702Reputation: 702
Those are all Xen virtual disks and logical volumes. Partition tables are handy on physical disks to figure out what's on them but are optional on logical devices as long as you can keep track.
 
Old 01-22-2015, 09:55 AM   #3
dorlack
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2009
Location: Cambridge MA
Distribution: Any Linux
Posts: 122

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2
Thanks!
 
Old 01-22-2015, 12:39 PM   #4
maples
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2013
Location: IN, USA
Distribution: Arch, Debian Jessie
Posts: 810

Rep: Reputation: 264Reputation: 264Reputation: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by smallpond View Post
Partition tables are handy on physical disks to figure out what's on them but are optional on logical devices as long as you can keep track.
So theoretically, could I do
Code:
mkfs.ext3 /dev/sdb
and as long as /dev/sdb was a hard drive appropriately configured in my /etc/fstab, it would work. Is that right? If that's the case, wouldn't it be better to skip the partition table if you only planning on using one partition on that disk and you don't use that disk for booting?
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Raid 5 suddenly doesn't contain a valid partition table laughing_man77 Linux - General 1 02-21-2013 11:24 PM
[SOLVED] new hard drive doesn't contain a valid partition table bmaguire Linux - Hardware 8 08-06-2012 02:58 PM
Disk doesn't contain a valid partition table? vihag Linux - General 5 01-16-2012 05:46 PM
Disk doesn't contain a valid partition table baldurpet Linux - Newbie 17 05-10-2009 04:25 AM
Disk doesn't contain a valid partition table expatCM Linux - Hardware 9 10-01-2007 03:38 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:03 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration