Do you allocate all disk space to logical volumes during installation?

[Mike Burger]

> On 9/23/08, mark <m.roth2006 at rcn.com> wrote:
>>
>> Joey Prestia wrote:
>> > Erling Ringen Elvsrud wrote:
>> >> Hello list,
>> >
>> >> It is often hard to know how much space is needed for
>> >> different mount points. Increasing the size of a filesystem is
>> commonly
>> >> described as a safer operation than reducing the size. Do you think
>> >> saving space (not absolutely needed) for later is a good idea /
>> common
>> practice?
>> >
>> > It is a very good practice to use LVM partitions for any that you
>> > believe may need to grow later down the road. And we never partition
>> the
>> > whole disk. You may never need it. But if you do need that space later
>> > it is invaluable to not have to shut down a machine and add a drive. I
>> > have found It to be very handy to have the foresight to do this and
>> used
>> > it many times to be advantageous.
>>
>> Yup. As I said in my article "Upgrading Linux" in the July '07 SysAdmin
>> (now
>> ceased publication, dammit), I recommend LVM for /usr, /home, and *very*
>> much
>> for /opt (since so much software these days wants to be there). I would
>> *never*
>> use LVM for /boot or /
>>
>> Size: 100M or so for /boot; 4G-8G for /, 20G for /usr, 4G for /var,
>> ditto
>> for
>> /tmp, and lots and lots for /opt and /home.
>
>
> What's the reason for not using LVM for / and /boot?

/boot is read at boot time...having /boot in LVM would mean that LVM had
to be, somehow, loaded at boot time.  Probably better for /boot to be a
fixed partition, rather than a logical volume within an LVM partition.

As for /, I'm using LVM for /, and it works fine.

-- 
Mike Burger
http://www.bubbanfriends.org

Visit the Dog Pound II BBS
telnet://dogpound2.citadel.org or http://dogpound2.citadel.org

To be notified of updates to the web site, visit:

https://www.bubbanfriends.org/mailman/listinfo/site-update

or send a blank email message to:

site-update-subscribe at bubbanfriends.org