1 |
On 07/01/19 10:46, Dale wrote: |
2 |
> From what I've read, that can be overcome. If you get say a SMART |
3 |
> message that a drive is failing, |
4 |
|
5 |
Yup, I have to agree that SMART isn't always reliable, but if you |
6 |
*monitor* it, it should give plenty of warning of the recording medium |
7 |
failing ... |
8 |
|
9 |
> just remove that drive or remove the |
10 |
> whole LVM setup and use something else until a working drive setup can |
11 |
> be made. Once ready, then move the data, if the drive still works, to |
12 |
> the new drive. That is basically what I did when I swapped a smaller |
13 |
> drive for a larger one. I moved the data from one drive to another. It |
14 |
> did it fairly quickly. Someone posted that it may even be faster to do |
15 |
> it with LVM's pvmove than it is with cp or rsync. I don't know how true |
16 |
> that is but from what I've read, it moves the data really efficiently. |
17 |
|
18 |
Point is, it works at a different level. Both cp and rsync are NOT |
19 |
guaranteed to copy your filesystem accurately - mine is full of hard |
20 |
links and that will give both those two a hard and nasty time. |
21 |
|
22 |
LVM copies the block device underneath the file system, so it is less |
23 |
efficient in that it will copy 3GB if you have a 3GB partition, but it |
24 |
is far simpler in that it neither knows nor cares what the file system |
25 |
is doing at the next level up. Give a file-system like mine to "cp -a" |
26 |
and it'll bring the system to its knees trying to keep track of where |
27 |
everything is. |
28 |
|
29 |
Cheers, |
30 |
Wol |