From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] ext2online fails Message-ID: <20011213120226.T940@lynx.no> References: <20011129095307.F29249@lynx.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from paulj@alphyra.ie on Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 04:19:58PM +0000 Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu Dec 13 13:00:03 2001 List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-lvm@sistina.com Cc: "Jonathan S. Polacheck" On Dec 13, 2001 16:19 +0000, Paul Jakma wrote: > On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > "ext2resize /dev/vg1/vol_usr" which will detect the size of the LV and > > resize the filesystem to fill it. > > surely for an LVM user it'd be more advisable to use 'e2fsadm' so as > to ensure the resizing of the LV and ext2/3 fs are done with regard to > each other (and without user intervention.)? or does ext2resize now > also resize the LV as neccessary? Well, if you read the context (not shown here), he already ran e2fsadm and it resized the LV for him, but the ext2online kernel patches were not in the kernel, so the filesystem was not resized. Hence the request to run ext2resize on the (already resized) LV directly. I agree that it is preferrable to run e2fsadm when doing this in normal cases. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/ http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/