FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-17-2011, 06:44 PM
Mark Knecht
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
> Ok, I thought you had it clear how you were going to resize the raid,
> and needed help resizing the filesystem that already existed on top of
> the RAID. I interpreted Mark's instructions as operating under that
> impression, too.
>
> Are you saying you don't already have a partition table sitting on top
> of /dev/md? ?
>
OK, I'm getting a little confused because I am Mark. Maybe you meant Neil above?

Anyway, yes, my question in the title is still the question. If, as I
understand reading between the lines, that the mdadm conversion from
RAID-1 to RAID-5 leaves me with a 250GB RAID-5 then how do I make it a
500GB RAID-5? My assumption right now is that mdadm won't change the
partition sizing so what I need to do is just resize the filesystem
and (I think) what I want are the right commands to run with something
like resize2fs, where you check, then resize, then check again:

e2fsck -f /dev/md6
resize2fs /dev/md6
e2fsck -f /dev/md6

However one site I found said to convert it to ext2 first - removing
the journal - and then adding the journal back in later.

- Mark
 
Old 11-17-2011, 06:47 PM
Neil Bothwick
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:59:06 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:

> Yes, resize would be done to /dev/md?. I agree. However I don't
> believe that I'd use Neil's suggestion of fdisk block numbers on
> /dev/md, right? That doesn't make sense to me and I don't beleieve
> Neil was suggesting anything like that.

Yes I was. /dev/md? is still a block device, and its blocks correspond to
physical blocks on the component drives.


--
Neil Bothwick

There are only two tragedies in life: one is not getting what one wants;
and the other is getting it. - Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)
 
Old 11-17-2011, 06:51 PM
Michael Mol
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> <SNIP>
>> Ok, I thought you had it clear how you were going to resize the raid,
>> and needed help resizing the filesystem that already existed on top of
>> the RAID. I interpreted Mark's instructions as operating under that
>> impression, too.
>>
>> Are you saying you don't already have a partition table sitting on top
>> of /dev/md? ?
>>
> OK, I'm getting a little confused because I am Mark. Maybe you meant Neil above?

Ok, yeah, I'm totally confused myself. I'm going to split my
concentration fewer ways for a bit and not try to write emails while a
test suite runs.

--
:wq
 
Old 11-17-2011, 07:34 PM
Mark Knecht
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:59:06 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> Yes, resize would be done to /dev/md?. I agree. However I don't
>> believe that I'd use Neil's suggestion of fdisk block numbers on
>> /dev/md, right? That doesn't make sense to me and I don't beleieve
>> Neil was suggesting anything like that.
>
> Yes I was. /dev/md? is still a block device, and its blocks correspond to
> physical blocks on the component drives.
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick

OK, so returning to your original response, you suggest increasing the
size of each physical partition and then resizing each of the physical
partitions independently? (/dev/sdwhatever instead of /dev/md6
directly?)

Is there a reason or personal experience you have to not to resize the
RAID-5 directly? I completely trust you as to date I cannot remember
anything you suggested I do that wasn't a good way to do it but doing
/dev/sdwhatever seems problematic if it had been an 8-drive RAID-1
becoming a RAID-5, etc.

- Mark

<quote>
Using cfdisk or fdisk, delete the partition and recreate it, USING THE
SAME START BLOCK at a larger size.

Then "resize2fs /dev/sdwhatever" will resize the filesystem to fill the
partition.
</quote>
 
Old 11-17-2011, 10:59 PM
Neil Bothwick
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:34:14 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:

> OK, so returning to your original response, you suggest increasing the
> size of each physical partition and then resizing each of the physical
> partitions independently? (/dev/sdwhatever instead of /dev/md6
> directly?)
>
> Is there a reason or personal experience you have to not to resize the
> RAID-5 directly?

Do you have separately partitioned drives with those partitions arranged
into single-partition arrays, or do you have one RAID device that is then
partitioned?

If the latter, you should certainly work with the md device.

I prefer to avoid all this confusion by creating a large, single
partition array that I use an an LVM physical volume.


--
Neil Bothwick

"You know how dumb the average person is? Well, statistically, half of
them are even dumber than that" - Lewton, P.I.
 
Old 11-17-2011, 11:13 PM
Mark Knecht
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:34:14 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> OK, so returning to your original response, you suggest increasing the
>> size of each physical partition and then resizing each of the physical
>> partitions independently? (/dev/sdwhatever instead of /dev/md6
>> directly?)
>>
>> Is there a reason or personal experience you have to not to resize the
>> RAID-5 directly?
>
> Do you have separately partitioned drives with those partitions arranged
> into single-partition arrays, or do you have one RAID device that is then
> partitioned?
>
> If the latter, you should certainly work with the md device.
>
> I prefer to avoid all this confusion by creating a large, single
> partition array that I use an an LVM physical volume.

Separately partitioned drives arranged into RAID arrays.

I don't do LVM. Every time I look at the instructions for setting it
up I fall asleep. Also, I have varying needs in terms of space, speed
& redundancy, so I'm not clear that a single RAID of any type with LVM
on top would have met my needs.

- Mark
 
Old 11-17-2011, 11:21 PM
Neil Bothwick
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:13:09 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:

> > Do you have separately partitioned drives with those partitions
> > arranged into single-partition arrays, or do you have one RAID device
> > that is then partitioned?
> >
> > If the latter, you should certainly work with the md device.
> >
> > I prefer to avoid all this confusion by creating a large, single
> > partition array that I use an an LVM physical volume.
>
> Separately partitioned drives arranged into RAID arrays.

So you have three partitions arranged into a single RAID5 partition,
say /dev/md1?

In that case, the size of /dev/md1 should already be correct and you only
need to resize the filesystem and you should ignore my witterings about
fdisk that filed to take into account your use of RAID.
resize2fs /dev/md1 should be all you need, you shouldn't even need to
unmount the filesystem.


--
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 12: Plastic glasses
 
Old 11-17-2011, 11:33 PM
Mark Knecht
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:13:09 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> > Do you have separately partitioned drives with those partitions
>> > arranged into single-partition arrays, or do you have one RAID device
>> > that is then partitioned?
>> >
>> > If the latter, you should certainly work with the md device.
>> >
>> > I prefer to avoid all this confusion by creating a large, single
>> > partition array that I use an an LVM physical volume.
>>
>> Separately partitioned drives arranged into RAID arrays.
>
> So you have three partitions arranged into a single RAID5 partition,
> say /dev/md1?
>
> In that case, the size of /dev/md1 should already be correct and you only
> need to resize the filesystem and you should ignore my witterings about
> fdisk that filed to take into account your use of RAID.
> resize2fs /dev/md1 should be all you need, you shouldn't even need to
> unmount the filesystem.
>

I have 3 partitions which were previously RAID-1. I've already failed
one drive so at this moment it's a 2-drive RAID-1. I'm attempting to
get those two remaining 2 partitions converted to RAID-5 the command
suggested on the RAID list for doing that isn't working for me.

Once the 250GB RAID-1 is converted to RAID-5 i have to add a new drive
back in to become a 3-drive RAID-5. The drive I add will be the drive
I just failed.

c2stable ~ # mdadm --grow /dev/md6 --level=5
mdadm: /dev/md6: could not set level to raid5
c2stable ~ #

c2stable ~ # mdadm -D /dev/md6
/dev/md6:
Version : 1.1
Creation Time : Thu Apr 15 10:45:35 2010
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 247416933 (235.96 GiB 253.35 GB)
Used Dev Size : 247416933 (235.96 GiB 253.35 GB)
Raid Devices : 2
Total Devices : 2
Persistence : Superblock is persistent

Update Time : Thu Nov 17 13:27:20 2011
State : clean
Active Devices : 2
Working Devices : 2
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0

Name : c2stable:6 (local to host c2stable)
UUID : 249c7331:a8203540:c8f3b020:fb30a66b
Events : 1039

Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 6 0 active sync /dev/sda6
1 8 22 1 active sync /dev/sdb6
c2stable ~ #
 
Old 11-23-2011, 01:02 PM
"J. Roeleveld"
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Thu, November 17, 2011 6:25 pm, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:01:46 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> I'm pretty sure I've got the command set right to do the RAID-1 to
>> RAID-5 conversion, but once it's done I believe the file system itself
>> will still be 250GB so I'll need to resize the file system. In the
>> past I've done this with gparted, which seems to work fine, but this
>> time I was considering doing it at the command line. Does anyone know
>> of a good web site that goes through how to do that? I've browsed
>> around and found different pages that talk about it but my reading
>> looks like they all have minor differences which leaves me a bit
>> worried.
>
> Using cfdisk or fdisk, delete the partition and recreate it, USING THE
> SAME START BLOCK at a larger size.
>
> Then "resize2fs /dev/sdwhatever" will resize the filesystem to fill the
> partition.

This would only be relevant when the raid-device itself is partitioned.
If the filesystem spans the entire block-device, this can be achieved by
the following:

resize2fs /dev/whatever

--
Joost
 
Old 11-24-2011, 08:00 AM
"J. Roeleveld"
 
Default Process to resize ext3 file system at the command line?

On Fri, November 18, 2011 1:33 am, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:13:09 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>>
>>> > Do you have separately partitioned drives with those partitions
>>> > arranged into single-partition arrays, or do you have one RAID device
>>> > that is then partitioned?
>>> >
>>> > If the latter, you should certainly work with the md device.
>>> >
>>> > I prefer to avoid all this confusion by creating a large, single
>>> > partition array that I use an an LVM physical volume.
>>>
>>> Separately partitioned drives arranged into RAID arrays.
>>
>> So you have three partitions arranged into a single RAID5 partition,
>> say /dev/md1?
>>
>> In that case, the size of /dev/md1 should already be correct and you
>> only
>> need to resize the filesystem and you should ignore my witterings about
>> fdisk that filed to take into account your use of RAID.
>> resize2fs /dev/md1 should be all you need, you shouldn't even need to
>> unmount the filesystem.
>>
>
> I have 3 partitions which were previously RAID-1. I've already failed
> one drive so at this moment it's a 2-drive RAID-1. I'm attempting to
> get those two remaining 2 partitions converted to RAID-5 the command
> suggested on the RAID list for doing that isn't working for me.
>
> Once the 250GB RAID-1 is converted to RAID-5 i have to add a new drive
> back in to become a 3-drive RAID-5. The drive I add will be the drive
> I just failed.
>
> c2stable ~ # mdadm --grow /dev/md6 --level=5
> mdadm: /dev/md6: could not set level to raid5
> c2stable ~ #
>
> c2stable ~ # mdadm -D /dev/md6
> /dev/md6:
> Version : 1.1
> Creation Time : Thu Apr 15 10:45:35 2010
> Raid Level : raid1
> Array Size : 247416933 (235.96 GiB 253.35 GB)
> Used Dev Size : 247416933 (235.96 GiB 253.35 GB)
> Raid Devices : 2
> Total Devices : 2
> Persistence : Superblock is persistent
>
> Update Time : Thu Nov 17 13:27:20 2011
> State : clean
> Active Devices : 2
> Working Devices : 2
> Failed Devices : 0
> Spare Devices : 0
>
> Name : c2stable:6 (local to host c2stable)
> UUID : 249c7331:a8203540:c8f3b020:fb30a66b
> Events : 1039
>
> Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
> 0 8 6 0 active sync /dev/sda6
> 1 8 22 1 active sync /dev/sdb6
> c2stable ~ #

I have never had to change a RAID-1 to RAID-5, but I would do it as follows:

1) Fail 2 drives from the RAID-1
2) Remove those 2 drives from the RAID-1
3) Create a new RAID-5 (with failed disk) using the 2 removed drives
4) Copy the data over from the RAID-1 to the RAID-5
5) Remove the RAID-1
6) Add the third drive to the RAID-5 and let it rebuild.

I don't know the commands for the above from memory, but I'm sure some of
this is in the man-page.

--
Joost

>
>
>
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:13 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org