Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #275930 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-12-21 18:50 +0100 |
| Last post | 2024-12-22 17:20 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 132 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
new computer arriving soon "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2024-12-21 18:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2024-12-21 20:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2024-12-21 21:20 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2024-12-22 02:20 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2024-12-22 02:20 +0100
UEFI, Export from Virtualbox [WAS Re: new computer arriving soon] "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2024-12-22 09:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2024-12-26 20:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-12-26 23:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-12-27 17:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2024-12-31 05:10 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-12-31 05:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2024-12-31 19:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-12-31 23:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2025-01-01 00:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-01 01:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon pocket@homemail.com - 2025-01-01 15:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Frank Guthausen <fg.debian@shimps.de> - 2025-01-01 15:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon pocket@homemail.com - 2025-01-01 15:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-01 16:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon pocket@homemail.com - 2025-01-01 17:20 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-01 18:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon pocket@homemail.com - 2025-01-01 18:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 03:10 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon pocket@homemail.com - 2025-01-02 03:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2025-01-01 17:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-01 18:20 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-01 22:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2025-01-01 19:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-01 22:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2025-01-02 14:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-03 04:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-03 17:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2025-01-03 13:10 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 03:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon pocket@homemail.com - 2025-01-02 03:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 04:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon pocket@homemail.com - 2025-01-02 04:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 16:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon pocket@homemail.com - 2025-01-02 17:10 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 05:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-04 11:20 +0100
Gene and networkmanager (was: Re: new computer arriving soon) Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 04:50 +0100
Re: Gene and networkmanager (was: Re: new computer arriving soon) gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-05 17:20 +0100
/dev/serial/by-id (was: Re: new computer arriving soon) Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 05:00 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id (was: Re: new computer arriving soon) gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-05 17:30 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-06 03:30 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-06 08:20 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-07 04:20 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-07 10:00 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-07 14:50 +0100
Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-01-07 16:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2025-01-07 16:50 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes eben@gmx.us - 2025-01-07 17:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2025-01-07 17:40 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes eben@gmx.us - 2025-01-07 18:00 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-01-07 20:40 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2025-01-08 06:30 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-07 17:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-07 17:30 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2025-01-07 18:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2025-01-09 04:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-09 05:50 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-01-09 16:30 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2025-01-09 18:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2025-01-09 21:50 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-10 00:50 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2025-01-10 01:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Timothy M Butterworth <timothy.m.butterworth@gmail.com> - 2025-01-10 02:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2025-01-10 11:00 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-10 15:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2025-01-10 07:30 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2025-01-10 15:50 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes eben@gmx.us - 2025-01-10 21:40 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-11 01:50 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2025-01-11 01:40 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Heriberto Avelino <heriberto.avelino@gmail.com> - 2025-01-10 01:30 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Kushal Kumaran <kushal@locationd.net> - 2025-01-07 20:20 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2025-01-07 21:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-07 23:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Urs Thuermann <urs@isnogud.escape.de> - 2025-01-10 03:00 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-10 05:30 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-01-10 15:40 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2025-01-07 23:10 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-08 00:30 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2025-01-07 17:40 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-01-07 20:30 +0100
Re: Mass storage sizes (was: /dev/serial/by-id) Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2025-01-09 08:40 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-08 04:00 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-08 04:10 +0100
Re: /dev/serial/by-id Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@debian-user.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2025-01-07 11:20 +0100
Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computer arriving soon] "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2025-01-02 17:00 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computer arrivingsoon] gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-02 23:10 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computer arrivingsoon] Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2025-01-02 23:20 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computer arrivingsoon] Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2025-01-02 23:30 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computer arrivingsoon] Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-03 00:10 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computer arrivingsoon] Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2025-01-03 04:00 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computerarrivingsoon] gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-03 05:00 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computerarrivingsoon] Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2025-01-03 14:00 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computer arrivingsoon] Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-03 03:40 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computerarrivingsoon] gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-03 05:10 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computerarrivingsoon] Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 04:30 +0100
Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: newcomputerarrivingsoon] gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-04 04:50 +0100
sgdisk missing under Armbian for Gene [WAS Specific mdadm instructions for Gene] "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2025-01-03 12:40 +0100
Re: sgdisk missing under Armbian for Gene [WAS Specific mdadm instructions for Gene] Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2025-01-03 12:50 +0100
Re: sgdisk missing under Armbian for Gene [WAS Specific mdadminstructions for Gene] gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-03 17:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 04:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2025-01-02 05:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> - 2025-01-02 08:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-02 23:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon fxkl47BF@protonmail.com - 2025-01-02 23:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> - 2025-01-03 00:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-03 00:20 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> - 2025-01-03 00:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2025-01-03 17:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-03 17:20 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2025-01-10 05:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2025-01-03 00:10 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> - 2025-01-03 00:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-03 00:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> - 2025-01-03 00:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2025-01-03 00:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2025-01-03 17:00 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 16:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Frank Guthausen <fg.debian@shimps.de> - 2024-12-31 20:20 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 04:10 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-01-02 23:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2025-01-06 06:10 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2024-12-27 20:20 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> - 2024-12-22 00:40 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2024-12-22 02:30 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> - 2024-12-22 05:50 +0100
Re: new computer arriving soon songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2024-12-22 17:20 +0100
Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next page →
| From | Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 04:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: new computerarrivingsoon] |
| Message-ID | <K131n-5xzP-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276327 |
On 03/01/2025 11:06, gene heskett wrote:
> On 1/2/25 21:32, Max Nikulin wrote:
>> On 03/01/2025 05:01, gene heskett wrote:
>>>> sudo apt install sgdisk
>>> unforch sgdisk does not appear to be available on armbian. Suitable
>>> substitute? Display is wayland so X is out. root not allowed.
>>
>> Gene, have you tried to type this command name into a search engine
>> prompt?
>
> no and now yes. no mention of any arm support, looks like a fedora src'd
> thing.
Have you tried to narrow down query to "sgdisk debian" or to "sgdisk
ubuntu" depending on armbian version you use?
>> Have you read "man man" to discover search facilities provided by man
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> database? I insist on this particular way with hope that it will help
>> to recall these options or commands next time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 04:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Specific mdadm instructions for Gene [WAS Re: newcomputerarrivingsoon] |
| Message-ID | <K13kJ-5xHH-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276341 |
On 1/3/25 22:21, Max Nikulin wrote: > On 03/01/2025 11:06, gene heskett wrote: >> On 1/2/25 21:32, Max Nikulin wrote: >>> On 03/01/2025 05:01, gene heskett wrote: >>>>> sudo apt install sgdisk >>>> unforch sgdisk does not appear to be available on armbian. Suitable >>>> substitute? Display is wayland so X is out. root not allowed. >>> >>> Gene, have you tried to type this command name into a search engine >>> prompt? >> >> no and now yes. no mention of any arm support, looks like a fedora >> src'd thing. > > Have you tried to narrow down query to "sgdisk debian" or to "sgdisk > ubuntu" depending on armbian version you use? > >>> Have you read "man man" to discover search facilities provided by man > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Apparently not recently enough Max, but have also been doing house maintenance, printing wrenches to aid replacing a leaky faucet. Wrenches worked great. >>> database? I insist on this particular way with hope that it will >>> help to recall these options or commands next time. Thank you Max. >>> Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 12:40 +0100 |
| Subject | sgdisk missing under Armbian for Gene [WAS Specific mdadm instructions for Gene] |
| Message-ID | <K0Oc2-5er7-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276306 |
On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 05:01:19PM -0500, gene heskett wrote: > > > sudo apt install sgdisk apt-get install gdisk > unforch sgdisk does not appear to be available on armbian. Suitable > substitute? Display is wayland so X is out. root not allowed. > > > > > Gdisk is the fdisk eqivalent that works with GPT It needs to be run as root or with sudo sgdisk is then available to you All the very best, as ever, Andy Cater (amacater@debian.org) > Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. > -- > "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: > soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." > -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) > If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. > - Louis D. Brandeis >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 12:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: sgdisk missing under Armbian for Gene [WAS Specific mdadm instructions for Gene] |
| Message-ID | <K0OlH-5gb3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276329 |
Andrew M.A. Cater (12025-01-03):
> Gdisk is the fdisk eqivalent that works with GPT
No need, fdisk itself supports GPT:
commit 766d5156c43b784700d28d1c1141008b2bf35ed7
Author: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@gnu.org>
Date: 2012-09-27 09:50:27 +0200
fdisk: add GPT support
This patch allows fdisk to handle GUID partition tables, based on the latest UEFI specifications
version 2.3.1, from June 27th, 2012. The following operations are supported:
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 17:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: sgdisk missing under Armbian for Gene [WAS Specific mdadminstructions for Gene] |
| Message-ID | <K0SSl-5nee-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276329 |
On 1/3/25 06:38, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 05:01:19PM -0500, gene heskett wrote: >>> sudo apt install sgdisk > apt-get install gdisk Thank you, a lot, Andy. >> unforch sgdisk does not appear to be available on armbian. Suitable >> substitute? Display is wayland so X is out. root not allowed. >>> > Gdisk is the fdisk eqivalent that works with GPT > > It needs to be run as root or with sudo > > sgdisk is then available to you > > All the very best, as ever, > > Andy Cater > (amacater@debian.org) > > >> Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. >> -- >> "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: >> soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." >> -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) >> If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. >> - Louis D. Brandeis >> > . Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 04:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0jBf-4TeI-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276230 |
On 01/01/2025 00:55, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 11:32:17PM -0500, gene heskett wrote: >>> Good question Marc. I'm searching for someone who knows how to combine 4 >>> ea 4T SSD's into one volume for use with amanda, the lvm docs are >>> somewhat confusing, lacking the context that actually teaches. [...] > 2. In the installer, use the RAID element to set up the disks as one md array > > That will give you one md partition spanning the four disks. I suspect that Gene is just going to configure LVM on a running system and it is completely unrelated to UEFI (so it is purely off-topic) and to the installer. The problem is that he can not use some search engine to find guides related to LVM. He believes that everything must be documented in man pages, but he ignores any tool that may help to find locally installed man pages.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 05:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0l0l-4UhY-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276272 |
On 1/1/25 21:57, Max Nikulin wrote: > On 01/01/2025 00:55, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 11:32:17PM -0500, gene heskett wrote: >>>> Good question Marc. I'm searching for someone who knows how to >>>> combine 4 >>>> ea 4T SSD's into one volume for use with amanda, the lvm docs are >>>> somewhat confusing, lacking the context that actually teaches. > [...] >> 2. In the installer, use the RAID element to set up the disks as one >> md array >> >> That will give you one md partition spanning the four disks. > > I suspect that Gene is just going to configure LVM on a running system > and it is completely unrelated to UEFI (so it is purely off-topic) and > to the installer. > This, since I've not done this yet, is quit likely true. > The problem is that he can not use some search engine to find guides > related to LVM. He believes that everything must be documented in man > pages, but he ignores any tool that may help to find locally installed > man pages. Sensible spelling of the utility's that do that would help that search effort considerably. I note that I've rx'd detailed help assuming I am using the installer, but no one has offered to teach me exactly what to type into a bash shell on a system that is booted to a working cli. I want to make a raid10 of nearly 8T out a 4 of these 4T drives. Do I even need LVM for a raid10 out of 4, 4T drives?. > > . Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 08:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0nOx-4W2M-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276278 |
On Thursday, 02-01-2025 at 15:22 gene heskett wrote: > > On 1/1/25 21:57, Max Nikulin wrote: > > On 01/01/2025 00:55, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 11:32:17PM -0500, gene heskett wrote: > >>>> Good question Marc. I'm searching for someone who knows how to > >>>> combine 4 > >>>> ea 4T SSD's into one volume for use with amanda, the lvm docs are > >>>> somewhat confusing, lacking the context that actually teaches. > > [...] > >> 2. In the installer, use the RAID element to set up the disks as one > >> md array > >> > >> That will give you one md partition spanning the four disks. > > > > I suspect that Gene is just going to configure LVM on a running system > > and it is completely unrelated to UEFI (so it is purely off-topic) and > > to the installer. > > > This, since I've not done this yet, is quit likely true. > > The problem is that he can not use some search engine to find guides > > related to LVM. He believes that everything must be documented in man > > pages, but he ignores any tool that may help to find locally installed > > man pages. > Sensible spelling of the utility's that do that would help that search > effort considerably. I note that I've rx'd detailed help assuming I am > using the installer, but no one has offered to teach me exactly what to > type into a bash shell on a system that is booted to a working cli. I > want to make a raid10 of nearly 8T out a 4 of these 4T drives. Do I > even need LVM for a raid10 out of 4, 4T drives?. I apologise for replying even after I now realise how little I truly understand LVM, maybe I will do some personal study on the topic. I like the idea of RAID 10. I have read that it provides best performance for Database systems. I once used/tested with RAID 6 and was amazed how long it took to rebuild a 3TB swapped hard drive (about 8 hours, if I recall). I do not believe you need LVM. But then I do not know what you are going to do with the RAID volume. Will you one day extend the RAID volume to 6 or 8 drives? How do you want to present its storage to your operating system? (e.g. One large partition, or smaller partitions. Will you allocate all of the storage straight away, or will you reserve some unallocated storage for later extending the partitions you first created?) This is my understanding of LVM: I have great admiration for LVM, it is stable, efficient, and seems low on over head. LVM was introduced to allow extending storage by adding extra physical drives. Storage space is allocated as virtualised storage, i.e. Logical Volumes. But if these drives do not have redundancy, for example, RAID, the lost of any one drive can be catastrophic to the Local Volume to which the failed drive's storage was allocated to. Hence if using LVM, I would always want to have the physical storage protected by some level of RAID which provides redundancy. Extending virtual volumes is not the only benefit from using LVM. Because of the physical storage being abstracted, backing up of live systems is possible, and I believe there is similar advances for managing Virtual Machines, including things like background virus checking. I believe BTRFS provides some of these benefits too, which leads people to question whether to use LVM on top of BTRFS file systems. I have never implemented LVM for my own systems, as I like to reduce any unneeded complexity, and I prefer to replace smaller storage with larger storage, than to extend exiting storage. I am curious what you will decide and how that decision works out for you. There is so much IT I would love to explore. George. Some reading for me later: https://www.baeldung.com/linux/btrfs-lvm https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/html/configuring_and_managing_virtualization/managing-storage-for-virtual-machines_configuring-and-managing-virtualization#managing-storage-for-virtual-machines_configuring-and-managing-virtualization > > > > . > > Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. > -- > "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: > soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." > -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) > If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. > - Louis D. Brandeis > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 23:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0C1b-560X-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276283 |
On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 06:29:08PM +1100, George at Clug wrote: >LVM was introduced to allow extending storage by adding extra physical drives. Storage space is allocated as virtualised storage, i.e. Logical Volumes. Yes and no. LVM was introduced to allow flexibility in how you assign space. It lets you add drives, or migrate between drives, or resize a volume, or make some volumes raid and some volumes not, all on the fly. If you use something like btrfs or zfs, then you probably don't want to add an LVM layer as it just complicates things in a redundant fashion. If you have a set number of drives and partition the whole thing up as a single volume, then LVM may not be worth the effort. If you have a relatively dynamic environment, LVM is a big timesaver. It can be somewhat complicated, and there are some gotchas in configuring things like raid, so for someone trying to put together an ordinary desktop that would be happy with one big partition and isn't likely to do an upgrade that isn't a full replacement, I probably wouldn't bother.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fxkl47BF@protonmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-02 23:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0CaR-564r-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276311 |
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025, Michael Stone wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 06:29:08PM +1100, George at Clug wrote: >> LVM was introduced to allow extending storage by adding extra physical drives. Storage space is allocated as virtualised storage, i.e. Logical Volumes. > > Yes and no. LVM was introduced to allow flexibility in how you assign > space. It lets you add drives, or migrate between drives, or resize a > volume, or make some volumes raid and some volumes not, all on the fly. > If you use something like btrfs or zfs, then you probably don't want to > add an LVM layer as it just complicates things in a redundant fashion. > If you have a set number of drives and partition the whole thing up as a > single volume, then LVM may not be worth the effort. If you have a > relatively dynamic environment, LVM is a big timesaver. > > It can be somewhat complicated, and there are some gotchas in > configuring things like raid, so for someone trying to put together an > ordinary desktop that would be happy with one big partition and isn't > likely to do an upgrade that isn't a full replacement, I probably > wouldn't bother. > i managed a half dozen hp9000 servers with 200 2gb drives lvm came in pretty handy :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 00:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0Ckx-56az-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276312 |
On Friday, 03-01-2025 at 09:46 fxkl47bf@protonmail.com wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jan 2025, Michael Stone wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 06:29:08PM +1100, George at Clug wrote: > >> LVM was introduced to allow extending storage by adding extra physical drives. Storage space is allocated as virtualised storage, i.e. Logical Volumes. > > > > Yes and no. LVM was introduced to allow flexibility in how you assign > > space. It lets you add drives, or migrate between drives, or resize a > > volume, or make some volumes raid and some volumes not, all on the fly. > > If you use something like btrfs or zfs, then you probably don't want to > > add an LVM layer as it just complicates things in a redundant fashion. > > If you have a set number of drives and partition the whole thing up as a > > single volume, then LVM may not be worth the effort. If you have a > > relatively dynamic environment, LVM is a big timesaver. > > > > It can be somewhat complicated, and there are some gotchas in > > configuring things like raid, so for someone trying to put together an > > ordinary desktop that would be happy with one big partition and isn't > > likely to do an upgrade that isn't a full replacement, I probably > > wouldn't bother. > > > > i managed a half dozen hp9000 servers with 200 2gb drives > lvm came in pretty handy :) Was fibre for networking part of that build? (I am guessing RAID was also used) What was the data throughput like? I set up a RAID with 8 drives once and was very disappointed in the performance. The redundancy was useful but not the performance. I think 200 would be a step up from 8, lol. George. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 00:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0CDT-56wR-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276316 |
On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 09:59:20AM +1100, George at Clug wrote: >On Friday, 03-01-2025 at 09:46 fxkl47bf@protonmail.com wrote: >> i managed a half dozen hp9000 servers with 200 2gb drives >> lvm came in pretty handy :) I have no good memories of hpux servers. :-D But yes, the linux LVM was inspired by HP/UX's. The best integration of volume management was probably AIX, where (for example) the package manager would check whether enough space was available on relevant partitions and ask if you wanted to grow them if there was not. I think (but I'm not certain) it could offer to shrink other volumes to make that possible. Don't take that as a recommendation to use AIX. :-D :-D >Was fibre for networking part of that build? (I am guessing RAID was also used) If there was fiber, it was probably FDDI or maybe ATM (155Mbit). 10BASE-F ethernet was a thing, but only made long runs possible rather than making things particularly fast. >What was the data throughput like? Maybe as good as your phone...this was probably 30 years ago or more.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 00:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0D6V-56Gx-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276319 |
On Friday, 03-01-2025 at 10:18 Michael Stone wrote: > On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 09:59:20AM +1100, George at Clug wrote: > >On Friday, 03-01-2025 at 09:46 fxkl47bf@protonmail.com wrote: > >> i managed a half dozen hp9000 servers with 200 2gb drives > >> lvm came in pretty handy :) > > I have no good memories of hpux servers. :-D But yes, the linux LVM was > inspired by HP/UX's. The best integration of volume management was > probably AIX, where (for example) the package manager would check > whether enough space was available on relevant partitions and ask if you > wanted to grow them if there was not. I think (but I'm not certain) it > could offer to shrink other volumes to make that possible. Don't take > that as a recommendation to use AIX. :-D :-D > > >Was fibre for networking part of that build? (I am guessing RAID was also used) > > If there was fiber, it was probably FDDI or maybe ATM (155Mbit). > 10BASE-F ethernet was a thing, but only made long runs possible rather > than making things particularly fast. > > >What was the data throughput like? > > Maybe as good as your phone...this was probably 30 years ago or more. LOL - I do recall using 1200 and 2400 baud modems. When 9600 baud modems came out, it was like WOW. (ouch the memory cells hurt) Windows 3.0 on LANtastic over a telephone line modem. Good for chatting, not so great for file transfer, but it was my first from 'home to a remote location' networking. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 17:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0SfD-5mIV-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276322 |
On Thursday 02 January 2025 06:43:07 pm George at Clug wrote: > > Maybe as good as your phone...this was probably 30 years ago or more. > > LOL - I do recall using 1200 and 2400 baud modems. When 9600 baud modems came out, it was like WOW. (ouch the memory cells hurt) > Heh. I remember a 300 baud modem where you had to dial the number on a phone and then flip the switch on the modem when the other end answered. Whether you selected the answer or originate mode was a crap shoot, there were a lot of c64-based BBSs in the area at that time, and they were set up either way. And of course people would pick up the phone while you were connected... I opened a box the other day while looking for something else, and saw a US Robotics modem in there. Probably the one I used when I ran a BBS, topping out at 33600 or so. Too bad the drives in that machine didn't survive real long, I had a fair pile of interesting stuff on there. -- Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and ablest -- form of life in this section of space, a critter that can be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters" - Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James M Dakin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 17:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0SyZ-5n6i-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276335 |
On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 10:54:21AM -0500, Roy J. Tellason, Sr. wrote: > And of course people would pick up the phone while you were connected... When I got a second phone for the modem I was truly living the dream. :D
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-10 05:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K3f85-7jP8-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276335 |
On Fri 03 Jan 2025 at 10:54:21 (-0500), Roy J. Tellason, Sr. wrote: > Heh. I remember a 300 baud modem where you had to dial the number on a phone and then flip the switch on the modem when the other end answered. Whether you selected the answer or originate mode was a crap shoot, there were a lot of c64-based BBSs in the area at that time, and they were set up either way. And of course people would pick up the phone while you were connected... Huh. That sounds positively streamlined compared with the acoustic couplers we used in the mid-70's, where you placed the telephone handset in a box and closed the lid. I think this is the very model: https://coimages.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/480/331/medium_smg00251098.jpg We logged on to Univ London Computer Centre by teletype at 110 baud. Although we could make calls to London at local rate, the private lines frequently weren't quiet enough, so we had to dial long-distance, $28 per hour in the mornings. Over half the department's phone bill originated from my number, and I would be sent the monthly Tiger log, with my calls heavily annotated with red circles and exclamation marks. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 00:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0Cud-56tz-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276312 |
On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 22:46:07 +0000, fxkl47BF@protonmail.com wrote: > i managed a half dozen hp9000 servers with 200 2gb drives > lvm came in pretty handy :) To be fair, HP-UX did not have the concept of disk partitions. There was no msdos or gpt. Just "use the entire disk" or "use LVM on the disk". So, you always ended up using LVM. But yeah, it was definitely one of the better HP-UX features. The Linux version is based directly on it (with extensions).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 00:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0Ckx-56az-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276311 |
On Friday, 03-01-2025 at 09:39 Michael Stone wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 06:29:08PM +1100, George at Clug wrote: > >LVM was introduced to allow extending storage by adding extra physical drives. Storage space is allocated as virtualised storage, i.e. Logical Volumes. > > Yes and no. LVM was introduced to allow flexibility in how you assign > space. It lets you add drives, or migrate between drives, or resize a > volume, or make some volumes raid and some volumes not, all on the fly. > If you use something like btrfs or zfs, then you probably don't want to > add an LVM layer as it just complicates things in a redundant fashion. > If you have a set number of drives and partition the whole thing up as a > single volume, then LVM may not be worth the effort. If you have a > relatively dynamic environment, LVM is a big timesaver. > > It can be somewhat complicated, and there are some gotchas in > configuring things like raid, so for someone trying to put together an > ordinary desktop that would be happy with one big partition and isn't > likely to do an upgrade that isn't a full replacement, I probably > wouldn't bother. +1 > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 00:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0Ckx-56az-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276283 |
On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 06:29:08PM +1100, George at Clug wrote: >I once used/tested with RAID 6 and was amazed how long it took to rebuild a 3TB swapped hard drive (about 8 hours, if I recall). Spinning disks are slow; 8 hours for 3TB is about 100MB/s and 8h is about how much time I'd expect it to take to write a commodity disk that size. It becomes really painful on a 24TB drive (8 times as large, 8 times as long; a fast spinning disk might be able to cut that down to a full day). If you want significant speed increases you need an nvme drive--but beware: there's a default rate-limit to minimize impact to other work. (see /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max, probably 200MB/s, and you'd want to set it much higher to fully utilize nvme storage.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George at Clug <Clug@goproject.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 00:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <K0CXf-56Dc-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #276315 |
On Friday, 03-01-2025 at 09:57 Michael Stone wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 06:29:08PM +1100, George at Clug wrote: > >I once used/tested with RAID 6 and was amazed how long it took to rebuild a 3TB swapped hard drive (about 8 hours, if I recall). (This was using an Intel 8 port SAS/SATA card, sadly I cannot get Battery Backup for it anymore, and running without battery backup is not worthwhile). > > Spinning disks are slow; 8 hours for 3TB is about 100MB/s and 8h is > about how much time I'd expect it to take to write a commodity disk that > size. It becomes really painful on a 24TB drive (8 times as large, 8 > times as long; 24TB drive - WOW - just thinking about that hurts. > a fast spinning disk might be able to cut that down to a > full day). If you want significant speed increases you need an nvme > drive--but beware: there's a default rate-limit to minimize impact to > other work. (see /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max, probably 200MB/s, > and you'd want to set it much higher to fully utilize nvme storage.) I assume speed_limit* is for mdadm ? When I get time, I would like to do some testing with mdadm. I think I did one test run about 10 or 15 years ago, but now I just work (er play) with Desktop computers where single drives and rsync backups is sufficient for my needs. I am too lazy for my own good, I guess. I think one issue with RAID is, most people do not keep watch on drive health, and it is only when the second drive fails and the whole RAID dies, that they notice there were issues long ago. (maybe that is just me?) Does anyone have experience with mdadm and for keeping an eye of the health of your drives and RAID? I am curious if you get timely notifications that a drive is not well (starting to get too many errors) and should be replaced, so you can replace the drive before failure? I get yearly power outages due to storms, though I do have UPS, sometimes they loose power before clean shutdown. I need to pay more attention to battery health and do testing, which I do not do, my fault. My recommendation to people 1) if you use UPS, test by putting your severs into read-only mode, then remove power and see if the system automatically powers down before the batteries fail. 2) if you do backups, occasionally try to do a full disaster restore from backups. I wonder how well mdadm survives unexpected power outages (or lockups)? Having had worked with Microsoft Operating systems, I was quite concerned about the possibility of lockups when I started working with Linux servers around 2009. As I think about it now, I have never had a lockup on a Linux server. And this very much holds true for my home KVM hypervisors and servers that I test with. The KVM hypervisors run 24x7 for about the past 15 years and have never locked up. Amazing and pleasing. Some reading for me: https://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/linux-raid-increase-resync-rebuild-speed.html The /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max is config file that reflects the current “goal” rebuild speed for times when no non-rebuild activity is current on an array. The default is 100,000. https://tldp.org/HOWTO/Software-RAID-HOWTO-6.html 6.5 Monitoring RAID arrays https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/html/managing_storage_devices/managing-raid_managing-storage-devices#setting-up-email-notifications-to-monitor-a-raid_managing-raid 21.18. Setting up email notifications to monitor a RAID https://medium.com/@kahalekar.sunil/how-to-configure-raid-and-monitor-disk-usage-ensuring-timely-notification-via-email-in-case-of-facf4c4d7656 https://www.ionos.com/help/server-cloud-infrastructure/dedicated-server-for-servers-purchased-before-102818/rescue-and-recovery/software-raid-status-monitoring-linux/ George. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web