Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- From: David Brodbeck <brodbd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:31:22 -0700
On Oct 9, 2007, at 6:32 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
LVM is fine. I don't see a reason not to use it.
Although I've seen more people (including myself) shoot themselves in the foot with lvreduce than with any other utility. After I did it I immediately realized it was my own fault, but I still felt kind of like this:
http://xkcd.com/293/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- From: martin f krafft
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- References:
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- From: Douglas A. Tutty
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- From: michael
- mdadm, partitioned array
- From: michael
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- From: michael
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- From: martin f krafft
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- From: Douglas A. Tutty
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- From: martin f krafft
- Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- Prev by Date: Re: udev and automounting
- Next by Date: Re: umask don't change
- Previous by thread: Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- Next by thread: Re: mdadm, partitioned array
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|