I can tell you how it turned out later.
Thanks
/Fredrik
----- Original Message ----- From: "André Gillibert" <rcvxdg gmail com>
To: <linux-lvm redhat com>
Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2009 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Disk crash on LVM
Ray Morris <support bettercgi com> wrote:
[...]
Then dd from the old copy of the LV to the new:
dd if=/dev/org/$1 bs=64M iflag=direct |
dd of=/dev/copy/$1 bs=64M oflag=direct
That piped dd is 2-3 times faster than the "obvious"
way to run dd.
[...]
The issue with dd is that if any read() fails, it skips the entry (64M) and
doesn't write to the output, making the output file smaller than the input
file.
with conv=sync,noerror, it's better, but, still loosing a whole 64M block
at once is a bad thing.
That's why I think dd_rescue would be better.
<http://www.garloff.de/kurt/linux/ddrescue/>
If it still gets warm too fast, I've heard that storing the hard drive in a
freezer 24 hours may make it work again.
<http://geeksaresexy.blogspot.com/2006/01/freeze-your-hard-drive-to-recover-data.html>
If it crashes when dd or dd_rescue fails, it's possible to continue copying
later, from the point it failed.
--
André Gillibert
_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/