[CentOS] partitions vs. LVs [was: Re: How to upgrade from 5.8 to 6.2]
Keith Roberts
keith at karsites.netSun Jun 24 16:42:18 UTC 2012
- Previous message: [CentOS] partitions vs. LVs [was: Re: How to upgrade from 5.8 to 6.2]
- Next message: [CentOS] partitions vs. LVs [was: Re: How to upgrade from 5.8 to 6.2]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sun, 24 Jun 2012, ken wrote: > It helps during their creation, rather than just accepting the defaults, > to give the LVs meaningful names. But even if you don't: > > # df -H > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-lvroot > 31G 12G 18G 39% / > /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-lvtmp > 195M 55M 131M 30% /tmp > /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-lvvar > 21G 1.2G 19G 6% /var > /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-lvhome > 185G 40G 136G 23% /home > /dev/hda3 518M 46M 446M 10% /boot > > > Where's the difficulty? OK. But what about a drive that is already partitioned with live data on it. Is it easy to make that work with LVM, or does it mean I have to do a fresh installation to use LVM? Keith ----------------------------------------------------------- Websites: http://www.karsites.net http://www.php-debuggers.net http://www.raised-from-the-dead.org.uk All email addresses are challenge-response protected with TMDA [http://tmda.net] -----------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message: [CentOS] partitions vs. LVs [was: Re: How to upgrade from 5.8 to 6.2]
- Next message: [CentOS] partitions vs. LVs [was: Re: How to upgrade from 5.8 to 6.2]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list