Hi guys
I already have 2 x RAID 5 Arrays configured on the same OMV Machine. Does anyone know if it is possible to create an LVM span across the 2 (to make one big drive) and retain the information already on the 2 x RAID 5 Arrays?
Thanks
Possible to create an LVM across 2 x RAID5 and retain the info?
-
-
Yes, use AuFS instead.
Greetings
David -
ok, i'll do some research on AuFS , as I have no idea what it is or how it works.
I assume it comes with OMV or is easy to install and use?
-
No but you could use the aufs or mhddfs plugins.
-
busy installing the plugin, will see if i can work this out and not lose any info...
-
You should lose no data.
-
ok, installed and read everything, kinda understand how it works now.
The part i am struggling with is i already have directories (i.e. SERIES, MOVIES, PERSONAL, etc...) on the RAID, so how do I set up the branch? Must I move all the current folders into a new folder called d1 and then use that as branch 1 on the one RAID and do the same on the other RAID as branch 2?
-
Create a shared folder at the root of each array. Use those as the branches.
-
thanks for the reply.
So do I then need to more my current directories into the newly created directory on root? Or is that directory just to point AuFS to that array?
-
No need to move anything. Basically, it is just telling aufs which drive to use.
-
that is freekin awesome!!!!
Thanks so much
now to work out a device busy error on creating the second raid.....
-
any bright ideas why i would get this message:
Failed to execute command 'omv-mkraid /dev/md8 -l raid5 -n 3 -N RAID2 /dev/sdc /dev/sde /dev/sdf 2>&1': mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric mdadm: chunk size defaults to 512K mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric mdadm: super1.x cannot open /dev/sde: Device or resource busy mdadm: /dev/sde is not suitable for this array. mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric mdadm: super1.x cannot open /dev/sdf: Device or resource busy mdadm: /dev/sdf is not suitable for this array. mdadm: create aborted
-
What is the output of (as root): cat /proc/mdstat
-
-
bear in mind that this will be a newly created raid5 with 3 x 1tb drives just added.
-
That array looks ok. What about: fdisk -l
I take it there is nothing on the second array? -
Yup, that is my current working array, no problems there.
Yup, I am creating another new array from scratch, here are the results of fdisk -l:
Code
Alles anzeigenDisk /dev/sda: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sda doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdb: 2000.4 GB, 2000397852160 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x60d30435 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 243201 1953512001 5 Extended /dev/sdb5 1 243201 1953511969+ 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/sdd: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x346bd15a Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 243201 1953512001 5 Extended /dev/sdd5 1 243201 1953511969+ 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/sdf: 1000.2 GB, 1000203804160 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sdf doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000203804160 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sdc doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sde: 1000.2 GB, 1000203804160 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sde doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdg: 250.1 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00080f7b Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdg1 * 1 29478 236775424 83 Linux /dev/sdg2 29478 30402 7420929 5 Extended /dev/sdg5 29478 30402 7420928 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/md127: 4000.8 GB, 4000792444928 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 976755968 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 524288 bytes / 1048576 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md127 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/dm-0: 2000.4 GB, 2000406183936 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243202 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/dm-0 doesn't contain a valid partition tableI see there is an issue with dm-0 from my old lvm that i thought i had removed completely, think that might be causing the problem?
-
I have never used lvm but I would guess that is the problem. Everything looks right.
-
hmm, 2 of those drives did used to belong to it, wonder how i remove them fully, cause there is nothing displaying under the lvm gui. so close, but yet so far.
-
Try: dmsetup remove dm-0
If that name isn't right, try: dmsetup list to get the right name.
Jetzt mitmachen!
Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!