On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 12:43:07PM +0300, Tapani Tarvainen wrote: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 09:11:27AM +1000, Alex Samad ([email protected]) > wrote: > > > but the marketing brief seems to suggest that if you lose a drive you > > only lose the files that were on there. > > I would take that with a big grain of salt. Marketing briefs > suggesting things without explicitly saying so are generally > not to be taken at face value. > > Unless and until someone either finds an explicit statement > by M$ to that effect or testifies having actually tried that, > I will remain skeptical. > > > with lvm you would lose any lv that has blocks on that drive > > Not necessarily, although recovery of a partially lost lv is > rather painful.
somebody else suggested a process on how to fix a missing pv (using
/dev/zero) and then fsck'ing thus giving you a mountable partition, but
how do you tell which files are valid and which are not !
Can yuo outline a process that allow you to find out which pv a file
exists on ? if so then yeah I am guessing you could recover from a
missing pv, but otherwise I would say not
> And of course raid/mirroring helps - with software raid as
> well as with lvm mirroring you can do it even with disks
> of different sizes.
>
--
I've always made it a solemn practice to never drink anything stronger
than tequila before breakfast.
-- R. Nesson
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
