Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 07 Aug 2002 08:54:41 -0500
From:      "Jack L. Stone" <jackstone@sage-one.net>
To:        Rob Ellis <rob@web.ca>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Questions about vinum and failure of root partition
Message-ID:  <3.0.5.32.20020807085441.02d62db8@mail.sage-one.net>
In-Reply-To: <20020807132232.GA47309@web.ca>
References:  <005e01c23dcb$061acbb0$6602a8c0@swbell.net> <200208070101.g7711iU06306@clunix.cl.msu.edu> <005e01c23dcb$061acbb0$6602a8c0@swbell.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 09:22 AM 8.7.2002 -0400, Rob Ellis wrote:
>one workaround for having to have a non-mirrored boot
>partition with 2 disks is to put 2 slices on each
>disk -- one for fbsd system partitions, and one for
>mirrored data...
>
> ad0s1, ad2s1 -> small bootable slices for os partitions
> ad0s2, ad2s2 -> rest of the disk for mirrored data partitions
>
>install fbsd on ad0s1, with partitions for / and swap
>and maybe tmp. partition ad2s1 the same way. create 
>your vinum mirror using partitions on ad0s2 and ad2s2
>and symlink /var and whatever else you want to directories 
>on the mirror.
>
>then create a backup of the fbsd partitions on
>the first disk, copying everything from ad0s1 to ad2s1:
>
>  dd if=/dev/ad0s1 of=/dev/ad2s1 bs=102400
>
>fsck the newly copied filesystems:
>
>  # a, e... are partitions
>  for i in a e f g h ; do fsck -y /dev/ad2s1$i ; done
>
>install ad0's master boot record to ad2
>
>  fdisk -B /dev/ad2
>
>and now the second disk is a bootable copy of the
>first; if the first disk fails, you swap the cables
>on the disks (make the secondary the primary)
>and reboot -- the os and vinum come back up.
>
>- rob
>
Rob: Thanks for this first time I have seen anything about filling the void
on the mirroring technique when using vinum. That missing ingredient has
always seemed to been a drawback and a deterrent.

My side question is about the "dd" command. Why did you choose the
parameter "bs=102400" rather than any other?? I've been using 8192, but
have seen this switch all over the map, including 1024 to 1M. I know it can
make a difference in the time to do an image because of the sizing. With
8192, I do an entire 40GB HD in 39 mins (1.4GHz CPU) but takes 49 mins for
a 1GHz CPU.

Best regards,
Jack L. Stone,
Administrator

SageOne Net
http://www.sage-one.net
jackstone@sage-one.net

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.5.32.20020807085441.02d62db8>