[nSLUG] Debian Wheezy partitioning...
rory at unixism.org
Sun Oct 19 15:37:19 ADT 2014
I know I'm late to this thread but I'll make another plug for LVM2. The
learning curve isn't too steep and the advantages make it worthwhile.
Plus, we're all supposed to like learning new Linux tech :)
Even on a single disk system the flexibility has saved my butt a few
times; well it has saved me significant time at least. On a multi-disk
or raid system the advantages are multiplied. The full stack of RAID +
LVM2 might seem thick when you're setting it up but I'll never setup a
file server any other way again.
Also if you use the 'full drive encryption' with recent distro versions
(which you always do on a laptop, yes? no? hang your head in shame! :) )
then you're using LVM2 already.
On 14-10-03 08:21 PM, Oliver Doepner wrote:
> - Ok, interesting that modern LVM2 overhead is low. Anyhow, I don't
> like the added complexity (call me mentally lazy) if I don't
> absolutely need it.
> - Corrupt sectors are probably a sign to replace the whole drive, and
> on a single drive system like laptop that means a reinstall anyway. I
> use a file server on the home network with automated backups to
> external disk (cron + rsync) to protect more precious data.
> - Regarding different filesystems: I use XFS for everything. I haven't
> noticed any problems for big or small files.
> - I like Debian and almost never install other distros. If I do I use
> a Live CD first, but usually don't want it to access my /home. My
> experience with other distros: Not enough momentum and developer base
> to be as solid and well thought-out as Debian.
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Dave Flogeras <dflogeras2 at gmail.com
> <mailto:dflogeras2 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:16 PM, Oliver Doepner
> <odoepner at gmail.com <mailto:odoepner at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > I heard LVM has significant overhead and is too complicated for my taste.
> Perhaps in the early days of LVM. I have not noticed any difference
> on any of my machines that have migrated to modern LVM2. As far as I
> understand, even without it, the kernel does translations between
> user-space, drivers, and the block devices (just like it does between
> a process' virtual memory and the machine's physical memory). LVM is
> just incorporated into this "table lookup" at the kernel level. The
> CPU can manipulate a pointer far quicker than most storage systems can
> read a block of disk.
> I know a lot of people have written about slow performance while using
> snapshots. I only let snapshots live for the duration of a backup,
> and for my uses some degradation is acceptable to get a consistent
> backup. I think some people use snapshots as a way to trying out new
> software installations with the option to revert. Their performance
> suffers until they merge or discard the snapshot.
> > Can anyone think of drawbacks of this single partition approach?
> Disadvantages might include:
> - A bad block causing filesystem corruption might lead to more damage
> - You cannot take advantage of different filesystem strengths for
> different types of data. For instance, I use reiserfs for situations
> when I know I will have many many <4k files (development trees,
> Gentoo's package manager, etc.). I use ext4 when I will have lots of
> big files, or do processing on batches of large files (benchmarking
> showed a marked improvement).
> - With separate /home and/or other user data partitions, you can
> easily install a new distro without wiping the whole disk and copying
> your data around (although doing this without working backups is a bad
> idea in any situation).
> There are many good points on pro/con multiple partitions here, as
> usual there is no right answer; it depends on your own situation:
> nSLUG mailing list
> nSLUG at nslug.ns.ca <mailto:nSLUG at nslug.ns.ca>
> Oliver Doepner
> nSLUG mailing list
> nSLUG at nslug.ns.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the nSLUG