From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [172.16.48.31]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id jARELOV26461 for ; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 09:21:24 -0500 Received: from eastrmmtao02.cox.net (eastrmmtao02.cox.net [68.230.240.37]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jARELHc5031749 for ; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 09:21:17 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.9] (really [70.179.95.46]) by eastrmmtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20051127142002.FCUW8508.eastrmmtao02.cox.net@[192.168.0.9]> for ; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 09:20:02 -0500 Message-ID: <4389C0F9.8040103@cox.net> Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 09:21:45 -0500 From: Old Fart MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] One of 8 PVs dead - Trying to rescue data from remaining 7 References: <4365F0AC.3090909@oxtel.com> <80d985600511252130j37b17586i9dd1649a958622ba@mail.gmail.com> <438881B0.4040000@cox.net> <80d985600511270409q6fadc509p151530b7e1083482@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <80d985600511270409q6fadc509p151530b7e1083482@mail.gmail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: rascal.jumper-747@cox.net.spamorama.redhat.com, LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: LVM general discussion and development Craig Hagerman wrote: > On 11/27/05, Old Fart wrote: > >> Craig Hagerman wrote: >> >>> On 10/31/05, Tom Robinson wrote: >>> >> I use raid 5 just for this problem. Have dropped 2 of the 3 raid >> devices and system keeps on truckin'. You can hot add devices back in >> and keep going while they sync. Good luck. >> >> > > Yeah, this would work with 3 discs, but doesn't answer the general > question about recovering data from a single LVM drive. In my 2 drive > system it wouldn't work. Any other ideas? I would assume that if one > drive failed it should be trivial to be able to access the information > on the remaining drive. If not, then I would be a lot safer going back > to a non-LVM system using the two drives as distinct partitions. > > Craig > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > > Take a look at a 2 disk raid 1 array as a pv. I have seen that array degrade to 1 drive and the LV was ok. -- Regards, Old Fart