| 1 |
On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 12:09:09 +0300, gevisz wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > Have you considered LVM? You get the benefits of separate filesystems |
| 4 |
> > without the limitations of inflexible partitioning. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I am afraid of LVM because of the same reason as described below: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> returning to the "old good times" of MS DOS 6.22, I do remember that |
| 9 |
> working then on 40MB (yes, megabytes) hard drive I used some program |
| 10 |
> that compressed all the data before saving them on that hard drive. |
| 11 |
> Unfortunately, one day, because of the corruption, I lost all the data |
| 12 |
> on that hard drive. Since then, I am very much afraid of compressed or |
| 13 |
> encrypted hard drives. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
LVM is neither encrypted nor compressed. The filesystems on it are no |
| 16 |
different to the filesystems on physical partitions, and subject to the |
| 17 |
same risks. An LVM logical volume is just a block device that is treated |
| 18 |
the same as a physical partition on a non-LVM setup. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Sp far, you have come up with reasons, good or otherwise, for not taking |
| 21 |
each of the available choices. You need to decide what you really need |
| 22 |
and what is important to you. Only then can you decide on the best |
| 23 |
arrangement for your needs. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Evolution stops when stupidity is no longer fatal! |
Archives