Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: filesystem on /dev/sdX is supported or partitions required

Hybrid View

  1. filesystem on /dev/sdX is supported or partitions required

    disk /dev/sdb is a LUN that could be extended if and when needed from Storage(SAN).

    1 - created a file system on /dev/sdb(without creating partition)
    Code:
    mkfs.xfs -m crc=1 /dev/sdb
    2 - mount the file system

    3 - while the file system was mounted, extend the LUN(/dev/sdb) from Storage

    4 - new disk size appeared when running
    Code:
    lsblk
    or
    Code:
    fdisk -l /dev/sdb
    5 - ran
    Code:
    xfs_growfs /dev/sdb
    Questions:
    a) should I rather use lvm ? any advantage that I am missing ?
    b) is it supported by SUSE to create file systems directly on LUN(as I did).. I am asking this because Yast does not allow to create file system directly on the disk(without first creating partition)
    Last edited by sharfuddin; 31-Jan-2018 at 14:44.

  2. #2

    Re: filesystem on /dev/sdX is supported or partitions required

    On 01/31/2018 06:44 AM, sharfuddin wrote:
    > Questions:
    > a) should I rather use lvm ?
    > b) is it supported by SUSE to create file systems directly on LUN(as I
    > did).. I am asking this because Yast does not allow to create file
    > system directly on the disk(without first creating partition)


    This has come up in the past, but I do not remember where. I believe (but
    do not know) that this is supported, but you are correct in that Yast will
    not let you do it. LVM is a great way to to have flexible filesystems,
    and I would use it over a partition-less disk because then you get Yast
    support and no questions otherwise on supportability, but that's just me.
    I believe all of your commands would work in an LVM setup, though you
    would need an extra command to extend the physical volume, or else add a
    physical volume and then add it to your volume group, and grow your
    logical volume.

    I also use LVM because it means I can encrypt everything if I need for
    boxes that need full-disk encryption.

    --
    Good luck.

    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    show your appreciation and click on the star below.

    If you want to send me a private message, please let me know in the
    forum as I do not use the web interface often.

  3. #3

    Re: filesystem on /dev/sdX is supported or partitions requir

    I opened an SR# 101144860381 and here is what they said:
    I would say that if you use it for the roo file system, I would suggest to reinstall. Now if it is file sytem for storage use, you can leave such as.

  4. #4

    Re: filesystem on /dev/sdX is supported or partitions required

    I think you should push back for an official stance, since the
    documentation seems to contradict them; on the other hand, now that
    they've said, as a representative of the company, that it is supported in
    some cases, you could potentially hold them to that fire, at least until
    somebody points out that the documentation correctly trumps people's opinions:

    https://www.suse.com/documentation/s...tml#sec.lvm.vg

    Code:
    Using an unpartitioned disk is not supported by SUSE Linux Enterprise
    Server. Thus we discourage you from using unpartitioned disks even though
    LVM can handle that solution.
    --
    Good luck.

    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    show your appreciation and click on the star below.

    If you want to send me a private message, please let me know in the
    forum as I do not use the web interface often.

  5. Re: filesystem on /dev/sdX is supported or partitions requir

    Hi,
    Quote Originally Posted by sharfuddin View Post
    Questions:
    a) should I rather use lvm ? any advantage that I am missing ?
    b) is it supported by SUSE to create file systems directly on LUN(as I did).. I am asking this because Yast does not allow to create file system directly on the disk(without first creating partition)
    a) Yes, I strongly advise to use LVM (and to put the PV into a partition, see answer to "b)"). LVM will give you the flexibility to i.e. live migrate to a different PV without bringing down the server, i.e. if the SAN system needs replacement. *Very* convenient, indeed. On top, you get all the flexibility to sub-divide that disk space, to move on to some extra redundancy (mirrored LVs) and generally stay more flexible.

    b) I recommend to *always* partition the disk. It is surprising how years later you may get haunted by some weird situation that will rely on that extra space between the partition table and the first (aligned) partition. Not to forget that system-level tools may get confused if the content of the first block, especially the "signature", is different from what to usually expect.

    That said, in the early days I had many systems set up to work without partitioning on additional disks... in those days, disk space was scarce and expensive. It did work, and besides above situations, I've not come across any major problems.

    Regards,
    J
    From the times when today's "old school" was "new school"

    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface, show your appreciation and click on the star below...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •