On Friday 21 December 2007 10:00:40 Galevsky wrote: > I am interested in your advice [that] LVM is not the universal solution > for partition management,
In the case under discussion, namely a stable server, I wouldn't challenge any advice to use LVM, but I was using it until recently on this semi-experimental desktop box and found I was getting too nervous for comfort. From time to time I would be tempted to give another distribution a spin, and every time I did it was unable to recognise my existing partitions (and therefore leave them alone). The same was true of a couple of rescue CDs I tried - which of course meant I couldn't use them. That isn't a problem now, not since I installed a small rescue system on a spare disk in the same box. So, for an unchanging system setup, by all means use LVM; for toy boxes it seems to me not to offer much advantage. Incidentally, I have 4 GB RAM in this dual-246 box, so I've put /tmp into a tmpfs, which greatly speeds emerges. This is from /etc/fstab: tmpfs /tmp tmpfs nodev,nosuid,size=6g 0 0 and this is from /etc/make.conf: BUILD_PREFIX="/tmp/portage/build" PKG_TMPDIR="/tmp" PORTAGE_TMPDIR="/tmp" PORTAGE_TMPFS="/dev/shm" The disks get a holiday (except when compiling Open Office) :-) -- Rgds Peter -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
