Re: LVM root?

[dtutty@porchlight.ca]

On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 09:41:31AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 09:09:11AM -0400, dtutty@porchlight.ca wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I'm planning the install of amd64 on my new box (Athlon 3800+, 1 GB ram,
> > Asus M2N-SLI MB, one Seagate 7200 80 GB SATA drive).
> > 
> > What are the advantages to using LVM for root?
> 
> Being able to resizeit later if needed I guess.
> 
> > I'm concerned about methods of recovery if something goes wrong.
> > 
> > If I don't do LVM root, here's my current drive layout:
> > 
> > Part.      mount      size
> > ==========================
> > 1          /boot      32 MB
> 
> Why a seperate boot?  Why such a puny root partition?  Are you putting
> tmp on tmpfs in ram?
> 

re /boot:  old habits die hard.  The wisdom I learned was that its less
likely to get corrupted.  If that's not an issue anymore, then I can
forget it.

Re root:  200 MB is twice what I've ever needed, with /tmp, /usr, /var,
and /home on separate partitions.  I doubled it so I wouldn't have to
resize it later.  What would you suggest?

> > 5          /          200 MB
> > 6          swap       512 MB
> > 7          PV1        remainder (78 GB +)
> > 
> > VG1        only need one volume group, currently containing PV1 only
> > 
> > LVusr      /usr       3 GB
> > LVvar      /var       15 GB
> > LVhome     /home      10 GB
> > LVtmp      /tmp       200 MB
> > 
> > This leaves most of the VG as spare to be allocated as needed.
 > 
> > Can/should one put swap in an LV or is it no better than a swap file
> > then?
> 
> I always put swap on a lv volume.  that way I can add to it latereasily,
> or get rid of it if i don't need it.
> 
If the swap on an LV doesn't add overhead, then it seems like a great
idea.