Linux - Server This forum is for the discussion of Linux Software used in a server related context. |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
|
03-24-2011, 08:44 AM
|
#1
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 78
Rep:
|
RAID Best Practices
It's been a while since I configured a raid and have been making some changes to my main workstation/server.
fdisk does not like md devices on my machine... always says it has an invalid partition table. While this is said to be normal all over the net, I don't feel warm and fuzzy about that fact.
What is best practice these days, to create a non-partitionable md device or a partitionable mdp device?
If I create a partitionable md device, I would imagine it would look good in fdisk. However, I am concerned about growing the array afterward. I would then have to grow the array, redefine the partition, and then grow the file system.
The PITA factor goes up. Has anyone worked with both? Pro/Cons?
My array was created with:
mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --level=5 --force --raid-devices=3 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
FYI: I have backups. I understand RAID 1 may be a better choice of raid level.
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 10:43 AM
|
#2
|
LQ Guru
Registered: May 2005
Location: Atlanta Georgia USA
Distribution: Redhat (RHEL), CentOS, Fedora, CoreOS, Debian, FreeBSD, HP-UX, Solaris, SCO
Posts: 7,831
|
What you might do to avoid having to "grow" the RAID partitions is to put your md device(s) into LVM. The md will give you the RAID redundancy you want and LVM will give you the flexibility of adding/removing md devices and/or extending/reducing logical volumes without having to deal with partitioning.
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 01:51 PM
|
#3
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 78
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MensaWater
What you might do to avoid having to "grow" the RAID partitions is to put your md device(s) into LVM. The md will give you the RAID redundancy you want and LVM will give you the flexibility of adding/removing md devices and/or extending/reducing logical volumes without having to deal with partitioning.
|
You're segueing into my next question... DM (which I'm pretty sure is LVM) doesn't show up well in fdisk as well... Is this normal? Based on the purpose of LVM, I am assuming so.
Thanks,
WT
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 04:01 PM
|
#4
|
LQ Guru
Registered: May 2005
Location: Atlanta Georgia USA
Distribution: Redhat (RHEL), CentOS, Fedora, CoreOS, Debian, FreeBSD, HP-UX, Solaris, SCO
Posts: 7,831
|
DM might mean "device mapper" or it might mean "dynamic multipathing".
Since Logical Volume Manager (LVM) logical volumes (LVs) are NOT true disks or partitions fdisk wouldn't be used to see detail about them. Instead you'd use lvdisplay. Most LVs end up with device mapper paths so this may be why you mentioned DM. However the Volume Group (VG) the LVs are in does have what it calls "Physical Volumes" [PVs} which can be whole disks, partitions of disks, meta disks or multipath devices. If you're using partitions or whole disks then fdisk will give you information (for whole disks it will tell you it doesn't contain a valid partition table but will show you the entire size of the disk.) For meta disks or multipath devices you might need to determine the underlying physical disks/partitions that comprise the device and do fdisk on those underlying devices.
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:34 AM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|