Re: Silo and Raid1
Quoting Simon Heywood <simon@triv.org.uk>:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:01:47 +0100, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
>> If you're going to use RAID on the disk, the first partition MUST start
>> on block 1 (one!), not 0 (zero). Can't remember exactly why (usually I
>> forget 'obvious reasons' :) but it have something to do with with ext2/3
>> inode list, the boot block or with the RAID system needing block zero for
>> something...
>
> The first few blocks of an ext2 or ext3 filesystem are unused, so
> putting one at the start of the disk doesn't matter - the SILO code and
> the disk label in block 0 of the disk are untouched.
>
> A partition that's part of an MD array will have data written to it from
> its first block, so if it starts on block 0 of the disk then SILO and
> the disk label be overwritten.
>
>> NOTE: This is true EVEN if the first partition isn't an MD!
>
> Why's that?
Don't know. It's the facts.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2003/08/msg00123.html
http://lists.suse.com/archive/suse-sparc/2002-Mar/0018.html
I don't have time to prove my point. Believe me or not. Your call.
--
Legion of Doom subway Cuba assassination congress kibo 767 DES PLO
NORAD Khaddafi killed toluene Saddam Hussein 747
[See http://www.aclu.org/echelonwatch/index.html for more about this]
[Or http://www.europarl.eu.int/tempcom/echelon/pdf/rapport_echelon_en.pdf]
If neither of these works, try http://www.aclu.org and search for echelon.
Reply to: