Re: [Clonezilla-live] Using CZ with Logocal Volumes

[Steven S. <st...@nc...>]

Hi Johnny,
Maybe this helps. As I mentioned, if you did that via "device to device' 
option, maybe you can try to do "device-image" option.
http://clonezilla.org/clonezilla-live/doc/fine-print.php?path=./01_Save_disk_image/06-dev-img.doc#06-dev-img.doc

Steven.

Johnny Stork wrote:
> Thanks guys, still no luck and I guess I have to give up at this point.
>
> Unless there are any more suggestions?
>
>
> Since the new drive is actuall physically seen as /dev/sda (the 
> original/source drive in the old RAID was seen as /dev/sdb), could this 
> be the problem and fixed with an edit to a lvm config file somewhere? Or 
> maybe they need new UID's?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I then disconnected the original source drives and booted from the 
> cloned drive alone in the system. Once again it kernel panicked and 
> could not find "VolGroup00"
>
> I then rebooted the CZ disk and went to the shell, and ran the following:
>
>
> pvscan:
>
> PV /dev/sda2 VG VolGroup 00 lvm2 [297.91 GiB /  0 free]
> Total:1 [297.91 GiB] / in use:1 [297.91 GiB] / in no VG: 0 [0  ]
>
> vgscan:
>
> Found Volume Group "VolGroup00" using metadata type lvm2
>
> lvscan
>
>
> ACTIVE    'dev'VolGroup00/LogVol00' [20.00 Gib] inherit
> ACTIVE    'dev'VolGroup00/LogVol02' [233.91 Gib] inherit
> ACTIVE    'dev'VolGroup00/LogVol03' [20.00 Gib] inherit
> ACTIVE    'dev'VolGroup00/LogVol01' [20.00 Gib] inherit
> ACTIVE    'dev'VolGroup00/LogVol04' [4.00 Gib] inherit
>
> On 4/16/2010 8:02 PM, Steven Shiau wrote:
>   
>> Kevin W. Wall wrote:
>>    
>>     
>>> Steven Shiau wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>       
>>>> BTW, for LVM, disk to disk is really done by dd in Clonezilla, so it's
>>>> very inefficient...
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>         
>>> What are you using for the block size for dd? If there's a way for you to
>>> figure out the hard drives cache size, that might be the most efficient.
>>> Or separate ibs&  obs parameters if using different hard drives with differing
>>> cache sizes.  In the old days, the conventional wisdom was to use a block size
>>> that corresponded to the block size of the file systems, but if you are
>>> doing raw disk I/O with modern drives that have huge on-board caches, that
>>> probably doesn't make sense. I'd think something like 8MB or even 16MB would
>>> be worth trying. Have you experimented with different sizes for bs / ibs / obs?
>>>
>>> -kevin
>>>
>>>      
>>>       
>> Kevin,
>> Thanks for sharing this. However, I was wrong... Now it's done by
>> partclone.dd.
>>
>> Steven.
>>
>>    
>>     
>
>
>   

-- 
Steven Shiau <steven _at_ nchc org tw> <steven _at_ stevenshiau org>
National Center for High-performance Computing, Taiwan. http://www.nchc.org.tw
Public Key Server PGP Key ID: 1024D/9762755A
Fingerprint: A2A1 08B7 C22C 3D06 34DB  F4BC 08B3 E3D7 9762 755A