Lvm partition cloned on the wrong disk
A partition and disk imaging/cloning program
Brought to you by:
steven_shiau
Menu
▾
▴
Hi,
I had some time ago make a full copy on my system using clonezilla. Having bought a new hard disk I told myself it would be a good way to check if clonezilla restores properly the partition.
So I plugged two hard disk to my computer (through e-sata external port), one containing the image (sdb) and the other the empty new disk (sdc). Both were properly recognized by clonezilla. I especially specified that I wanted the image present on sdb to be restored on sdc. Then I let run clonezilla during the whole night. Well things went fine... except I had a very bad surprise on the morning. The image was containing a linux os partition, a win XP os partition, a fat32 partition and a vista os partition. If quite everything was fine on sdc, the whole system restored as the original was, I had a very bad surprise on my sda (ie: the main hard disk of my computer). When I booted linux (on sda), I had strange messages and discovered that the lvm partition (containing amongst over /home) was the old one restored from the clonezilla image! (The linux partition of sda is made of an extended partition, one containing /boot and another being a lvm). Apparently, clonezilla has replaced the lvm partition with the one coming from the image (from sdb) instead on just writing it on sdc!!! (btw, clonezilla didn't modified other parts of sda: the /boot and the other partitions are fine).
Any clue of what I can do to recover the lost data (around one month of data!!)?
(And btw, I suggest you investigate and correct this bug as soon as possible...)
(I used clonezilla live 1.2.2-14)
Oops... Yes, in your case, yes, there is a problem... Since you were restoring the LVM image, actually if there are some LV existing on the disk, Clonezilla will restore the LV image to the existing LV, since there is no way you can have 2 exactly the same LVs on a system.
We will try to figure it out to see if any way we can avoid this. For the time being, if you will do it again, remember to remove the source disk "/dev/sda" from your machine.
As for recovering the lost data, sorry, I really can not find any good method to recover them, because they were overwritten I think.
Sorry to hear that. As the program suggests in the first few menus, it's recommended to back up important data before you restore or clone. It's the best way you can recover the data when something goes wrong.
Steven.
As the great Duke Nukem used to say: "shit happens"...
Well, well, well.
I suppose I'm going to have fun with photorec and other testdisk...
btw, honestly, would it have done the same using another software? Is it something specific to lvm partitions?
And would the good old "dd "have done the same mistake?
Regards.
ps:
"As the program suggests in the first few menus, it's recommended to back up important data before you restore or clone"
Yep... I know (now! :D ). Seriously, I even though to remove physically sda before...(didn't because complicated: using a laptop, and because I though I was too paranoid). But, seriously, if you were at my place, with not much knowledges about all this lvm stuff, wouldn't you have done the same mistake...? I was expecting that at worst the two involved disk may get trouble, but not one of the plugged disk. Maybe it could be useful you add some about this in the "first few menu".
Bourgroumph,
Thanks for pointing this. We will try to have some method to avoid this happens again in the future release.
Steven.
btw, I noticed other trouble. It sometimes took 2 or 3 times to do a nice cloning (ie: some partition wasn't considered fine, etc). Next time it happens I'll write and tell u.
Actually the only good result I had was by using the good ol' "dd" command.
I suggest you could include it as a possible setting in the "disk to disk " choice.
After some experience under linux (and windows!), I've come to think that "new functionality" goes to often with "new bugs included too"...
As for my own situation, I think the full night will be playing with the aforementioned photorec and diskrescue, hopping the second one could avoid me to be obliged to use the first one... if the first one can still do anything...