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

[Johnny S. <li...@op...>]

Ok and thanks again Steven I will try and send the image to another 
server and see if that will work.

But also, each time I tried to start with the new, imaged drive, I 
always had the original disks disconnected so the two sets of LVM's were 
never visible at the same time.

But hey, I have been trying now for 2 weeks so one more method certainly 
cant hurt and who knows? Maybe this will be the one!

On 4/16/2010 8:55 PM, Steven Shiau wrote:
> Hi Johnny,
> If you have ssh, nfs, or Samba server, you can save the image on that 
> server, and the space does not require to be 320GB, Clonezilla will 
> only save the used blocks, and it will compress too. E.g. if the only 
> space on the disk is about 100 GB, and the save image might be 30 GB.
>
> "Device to device" clone is not really the same as "device -> image -> 
> device", since after you save the device as the image, you can remove 
> the original, source disk, replace it with destination disk. Then the 
> same LVM won't coexist at the same time.
>
> Steven.
>
> Johnny Stork wrote:
>> Unfortunately I dont have a spare 320gb on a single drive anywhere to 
>> place the image. But if its an identical image, how could this make a 
>> difference? Would this file image simply be the same image reproduced 
>> on the second drive?
>>
>> I believe the issue has something to do with the physical drive going 
>> from /dev/hdb to /dev/hda on the copy/target, and/or having UID's for 
>> the drive being different.
>>
>> Thsi seems to make sense but I dont know how to address it.
>>
>> Thanks again for all your help :)
>>
>> On 4/16/2010 8:19 PM, Steven Shiau wrote:
>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 

Johnny Stork