[Gllug] still wondering about lvm

[Adrian McMenamin]

On Sun, 2006-03-12 at 02:08 +0000, Nix wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006, Adrian McMenamin suggested tentatively:
> > On Sun, 2006-03-12 at 00:52 +0000, Nix wrote:
> > 
> >> Because VGs contain a pool of space which *may or may not* be allocated
> >> to LVs, and those LVs *may or may not* be mounted (and may not even be
> >> mountable: e.g. invalid snapshot volumes), and the mounted filesystems
> >> *may or may not* be visible by the current process (although currently
> >> most processes can see the same filesystem tree, this is not necessarily
> >> the case).
> > 
> > Yes, I understand that point now :) PITA though cos I have to go down to
> > single user and this box lives in a corner of my living room with
> > nothing more attached to it than a printer and a CAT5 cable :( 
> 
> You don't have to go down to single user for a pvscan. It should be
> safe enough unless your PVs are so badly buggered that, well, if
> they're so buggered that pvscan can't see them, I can't imagine
> how they're active now :)

I meant to do the mounting. Too many service running off the main VG to
unmount it before growing the fs otherwise

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug