Re: [SOLVED] Re: Partitioning And Formatting A Large Disk (2086.09GB)
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:56:31PM -0500, Michael S. Peek wrote:
> Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> >I think this is the precise reason that IBM invented JFS. Its all I
> >use for everything.I'm curious why you don't use LVM on top of the
> >hardware raid.
>
> Simplification mostly. Why do it if I don't have to?
>
> This box is a redundant backup for another (with older hardware, I had
> no choice but use software RAID on that one). But since it is a backup,
> I have the luxury of taking one down to tinker with the arrays while the
> other takes over full time, so I wasn't convinced that the cost of
> complicating the setup with things like LVM or mdadm would be worth the
> perks. At least in my case.
>
> I'm open to arguments for or against if anyone has any feelings about
> it, as I'm nowhere near sure that the setup I'm using is the best thing
> to do.
>
> >What
> >happens when you need to add more drives than that one controller can
> >handle?
> >
>
> The case and controller are already maxed out at 16 drives. If I need
> more space, then I'll probably just upgrade to larger drives and rebuild
> the arrays.
>
> I'm facing just such an upgrade dilemma with the older box now. Some of
> the older drives are beginning to fail, so I have a choice: buy more
> drives of the same size to replace the failing ones, or start buying
> larger drives and start upgrading the arrays.
>
Sounds like an excellent reason to use LVM. pvmove the lv extents off
the failing drives (or arrays) then add new drives. LVM is no more (and
perhaps less) complicated than regular partitions and give you some
flexibility.
As far as filesystems, seriously consider JFS. google search
site:ibm.com jfs, and a thread on debian lists. JFS can be grown but
not shrunk.
Doug.
Reply to: