ext2resize-devel Mailing List for GNU ext2resize (Page 9)

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

UN SALUDO A TODOS.

Gracias por su ayuda.

Necesito saber si con ext2resize, puedo reparticionar en CALIENTE - HOT

BYE
R.

On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 06:55:35AM -0600, Ricardo Colin wrote:
> Que tal.
> Antes que nada les mando un saludo, me urge sabes si ext2resize tiene
> una versi=F3n estable.

1.1.x es la versi=F3n estable ahora.  1.0.x no estas mantenido m=E1s.

[Traducci=F3n / Translation]
> Before I say anything, greetings.  Can you
> tell me if ext2resize has a stable version?

1.1.x is the stable version. 1.0.x isn't maintained any more.

Andrew

Que tal.
Antes que nada les mando un saludo, me urge sabes si ext2resize tiene
una versi=F3n estable.

Gracias !!!

Ricardo Col=EDn
Ciudad de M=E9xico

On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 03:54:48PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Jan 16, 2002  04:20 -0600, Ricardo Colin wrote:
> > Hola, antes que nada un saludo a todos, necesito informaci=F3n de com=
o
> > utilizar el ext2resize, as=ED como saber que tan eficiente es.
>
> Can you please be more specific if you have any further questions?

FWICT, he was asking about efficiency...

(Yo achoy que el est=E1 perguntando de como eficiente es)

I only semi understand from similarity to portuguese.  No dictionary.

Andrew

On Jan 16, 2002  04:20 -0600, Ricardo Colin wrote:
> Hola, antes que nada un saludo a todos, necesito informaci=F3n de como
> utilizar el ext2resize, as=ED como saber que tan eficiente es.

Apesadumbrado, mi espanol no es asi que bueno (Babelfish me esta
ayudando aqui). Hay paginaciones del "man" para usar ext2resize
incluido.

Puede usted por favor ser mas especifico si usted tiene cualquier
pregunta mas otra?

----------------

Sorry, my Spanish is not so good (Babelfish is helping me here).
There are man pages for using ext2resize included.

Can you please be more specific if you have any further questions?

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/

Ricardo Col=EDn
Ciudad de M=E9xico

Hola, antes que nada un saludo a todos, necesito informaci=F3n de como
utilizar el ext2resize, as=ED como saber que tan eficiente es.

Gracias.

>Well, I _do_ have a more up-to-date ext3 online resize patch for 2.2
>(a completely different implementation than the above), but I have never
>finished the support for it in the user tools (it has a different on-disk
>format for the reserved inode).  I have never released this code publicly
>(to a few people privately, and at one point some people had said they
>would finish the support in the user tools, which never happened).
>
>The other problem was that this was built on a 2.2 ext3 codebase that
>also had a lot of other patches in it (LFS and other changes) so it was
>also too much work to just release the online resizing part of the patch.
>
>"One day" I will port this to 2.4, but if you have some interest in
>doing so, it should be a relatively straight forward port, and I can
>send you the patch.  As always, if enough people bug me about it, I'm
>more likely to work on it when I get a chance.  As it is, I never hear
>whether people are using ext2online (not even bug reports, except the
>occasional question about a patch for a newer kernel), so there doesn't
>"appear" to be a demand for this, to me at least.
Well, I've a definite interest to get that working online with 2.4.

If it's just a matter of forward-porting, I could make an attempt - but I'm
not firm enough in kernel-programming to do serious development.
(Maybe, if I'm very lucky, one or other small fix - but that's it.)

So, if you have a patch and some documentation of the state the patch is in
- let's have a try.
At least I can do some tests and report them.
But in the end I'd really like that to be included in linus' kernel - I
think it's important enough for that.

What about the userspace-tools? Do they need modification too?

Thanks for the answer!

Regards,

Phil

On Jan 09, 2002  15:36 +0100, Ph. Marek wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> If I look into the current CVS sources I find the following:
> 
> patches/README:
> online-ext3-2.2.diff - 2.2.16 kernel patch for online ext3 resizer
>                      - it does not really work properly, especially on a
>                         filesystem that is being modified (ext3 ASSERTs)
> 
> So currently there's no patch for 2.4.17+ and ext3.
> Is somebody working on this?

Well, I _do_ have a more up-to-date ext3 online resize patch for 2.2
(a completely different implementation than the above), but I have never
finished the support for it in the user tools (it has a different on-disk
format for the reserved inode).  I have never released this code publicly
(to a few people privately, and at one point some people had said they
would finish the support in the user tools, which never happened).

The other problem was that this was built on a 2.2 ext3 codebase that
also had a lot of other patches in it (LFS and other changes) so it was
also too much work to just release the online resizing part of the patch.

"One day" I will port this to 2.4, but if you have some interest in
doing so, it should be a relatively straight forward port, and I can
send you the patch.  As always, if enough people bug me about it, I'm
more likely to work on it when I get a chance.  As it is, I never hear
whether people are using ext2online (not even bug reports, except the
occasional question about a patch for a newer kernel), so there doesn't
"appear" to be a demand for this, to me at least.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/

Hello everyone,

If I look into the current CVS sources I find the following:

patches/README:
online-ext3-2.2.diff - 2.2.16 kernel patch for online ext3 resizer
                     - it does not really work properly, especially on a
                        filesystem that is being modified (ext3 ASSERTs)

So currently there's no patch for 2.4.17+ and ext3.
Is somebody working on this?

I'd like that very much!!

Regards,

Phil

On Nov 15, 2001  07:27 +0100, Ph. Marek wrote:
> I'm very impressed of the possibility of online-resizing ext2 (using the
> kernel-patch). But as of 2.4.14pre4 ext3 has been included into the
> -linus-kernel and ext2 being the same as ext3 (disk-layout meant) does the
> resizing (kernel-patch + utilities) work for ext3 too? (preferably *online*)

The offline resizing works fine, as you suspected.  (Note that you don't need
the kernel patch for offline resizing of ext2 or ext3).  However, the online
resizing does not work for ext3 yet.  Almost a year ago, I worked on doing
online ext3 resizing (for 2.2 kernels), and it was mostly done, but I have
never ported it to 2.4 ext3 yet.  It needs some small changes to the format
of the reserved node, so ext2prepare needs to be changed also.

More and more people have started bugging me about this, so I will probably
start working on it again.

> I'd expect that ext2resize would have to resize the journal too - which
> it's likely to have problems with if it's on another device instead of just
> a file in the filesystem, but it should be doable - especially if you're
> using lvm (which is the point where online-resizing makes sense, after all).

Well, I won't try to resize the journal at all.  It would be possible, but
it is also possible to just delete the journal and create a new one.  Since
it is not _required_ to have a larger journal for a larger filesystem, it
is just more complexity that adds the possibility of a problem.  I don't
think that it would be very easy to do online journal resizing, and once
you unmount the fs, you can just use tune2fs to delete and re-create one.

Also this would possibly fragment the journal a lot (normally the journal
is at the start of the fs, but if the fs is full, the only free space
will be at the end, so you will seek the whole disk while writing to the
journal, ugh).  You are far better off to delete the journal, and create
a new one, which will probably be contiguous in the new group.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/

Hi everybody!

I'm very impressed of the possibility of online-resizing ext2 (using the
kernel-patch). But as of 2.4.14pre4 ext3 has been included into the
-linus-kernel and ext2 being the same as ext3 (disk-layout meant) does the
resizing (kernel-patch + utilities) work for ext3 too? (preferably *online*)

Has anyone tried that yet or is work in progress to support that?
I'd expect that ext2resize would have to resize the journal too - which
it's likely to have problems with if it's on another device instead of just
a file in the filesystem, but it should be doable - especially if you're
using lvm (which is the point where online-resizing makes sense, after all).

Thanks for all answers!

Regards,

Phil

On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Yes, in the ext2resize "NEWS" file (maybe only in CVS, I can't remember
> if it went into the 1.1.17 release or not) there is a report from a user
> going from 150GB -> 240GB -> 463GB.  All went well.

  Must be in CVS, 'cause the NEWS file in 1.1.17 is empty.  :)  But it is
good to know this is not completely uncharted territory.

>> (2) Do the people familiar with ext2resize think it will work?
>
> Yes.  Granted that I don't get a lot of feedback on ext2resize ...

  When it comes to bug reports, I have discovered that "no news is good
news".  :-)

> The only recent emails have either been about the large_file issue (see
> below), or requests for ext2online for ext3.

  Well, we are not using the large_file feature, and we will be doing this
offline, so both of those are non-issues.

> To give yourself a comfort factor of to show ext2resize is doing
> something, I'd suggest running with "-v" or "-v -d".  The latter may be
> too verbose, but it would be very useful to have in case there are any
> problems ...

  Okay, I will do that -- useful tip.

> Deleting files you don't really need will speed things up ...

  Heh.  If we had files we didn't need, we wouldn't be adding 400 GB worth
of new disks!  :-)

> You will obviously want to do a full fsck before you do the resize ...

  I was planning on a full fsck before and after.  I definitely subscribe to
the "better safe than sorry" theory.  :)

> Also, in light of this you may want to consider using ext3 at some
> (near) later date to avoid extended outages.

  We have been considering that as well, but in almost two years of
operation, we have never had a system crash, so it has not been a pressing
need.

> Please let me know how things go, so I can add this report to the NEWS
> file for the next release.

  Will do.  Thanks for your help!

-- 
Ben Scott           | Net Technologies, Inc.  | 978-462-8795
Network Engineer    | Salisbury, MA, USA      | 866-NTI-LINUX (684-5468)
bs...@nt... | http://www.ntilinux.com | Fax: 978-499-7839

On Nov 01, 2001  21:27 -0500, Benjamin Scott wrote:
>   We are considering using ext2resize to expand a 204 GB filesystem by 396
> GB, resulting in a 600 GB filesystem.
> 
>   (1) Has anyone ever tried ext2resize on filesystems this large before?

Yes, in the ext2resize "NEWS" file (maybe only in CVS, I can't remember
if it went into the 1.1.17 release or not) there is a report from a user
going from 150GB -> 240GB -> 463GB.  All went well.

>   (2) Do the people familiar with ext2resize think it will work?

Yes.  Granted that I don't get a lot of feedback on ext2resize,
generally people will complain if there is a bug in a program,
especially if it corrupts their data.  I basically never get such
reports.  The only recent emails have either been about the
large_file issue (see below), or requests for ext2online for ext3.

>   (3) Any guesses on how long it will take?

The above report says it took 40 minutes to do the 240->463GB resize.
I don't have details about the system in question.  That was 7 months
ago, so given Moore's law and the fact that you are resizing a larger
filesystem I would say it will take about the same.

To give yourself a comfort factor of to show ext2resize is doing
something, I'd suggest running with "-v" or "-v -d".  The latter may be
too verbose, but it would be very useful to have in case there are any
problems, so you can send it to me - you can tee it to a file, just in
case, like:

ext2resize -v -d <dev_big> 2>&1 | tee /tmp/ext2resize.log

>   (4) Any tips on what I can do to make it go faster, given the large RAM
>       size of the machine?

Deleting files you don't really need will speed things up, since if a file
is in the way of metadata, it will need to be copied to a new location,
whereas less files means less copying.

You will obviously want to do a full fsck before you do the resize,
to ensure that there are no bad things in the fs which may confuse the
resizer. Also, given the fsck time for large filesystems (about 30 minutes
per 100GB is my understanding) you may want to do this in advance if
you have a short outage window.

Also, in light of this you may want to consider using ext3 at some (near)
later date to avoid extended outages.  Ext2resize will work just fine
with unmounted ext3 filesystems also.  Ext3 is very stable on 2.2 kernels.
I used it for a year while I was still on 2.2, without any problems.

>   (5) Are there any pitfalls I should be aware of?

If you have large files (> 2GB) in the filesystem, then the 1.1.17 code
will not work.  It is not so much an issue of the code being broken as
it is of the code (correctly) refusing to resize a filesystem that has
features it does not understand.  However, since the actual file size
is never changed by ext2resize, and any moved inodes are copied directly
from one location to another it turns out that everything is OK.

You can check this in advance with "dumpe2fs -h <dev>" and look for the
"large_file" feature:

$ dumpe2fs -h /dev/vgtest/lvtest
Filesystem volume name:   test fs
Last mounted on:          <not available>
Filesystem UUID:          10921832-6d83-4d21-bb30-3726730bbd4d
Filesystem magic number:  0xEF53
Filesystem revision #:    1 (dynamic)
Filesystem features:      has_journal filetype sparse_super large_file
                                                            ^^^^^^^^^^		
If this is the case, it is a one-line fix+recompile to avoid this problem.
I have just not gotten around to making a new release yet.

It is also a good idea to do a full fsck afterwards, to ensure everything
went well.  The ext2resize code is designed to abort rather than writing
bad data to the disk, but given that I have never personally tested such
large resizes there may be (unlikely) corner cases that are overlooked.
Even during development (i.e. more likely to cause breakage), basically
any ext2resize failure can be corrected by running e2fsck.

Please let me know how things go, so I can add this report to the NEWS
file for the next release.  Obviously, if you have any problems, also
contact me.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/

Hello,

  We are considering using ext2resize to expand a 204 GB filesystem by 396
GB, resulting in a 600 GB filesystem.

  Resizing of the actual partitions/devices will be handled via some
combination of the hardware RAID controller and/or the standard Linux LVM.

  The system is question is running kernel 2.2.19 (Red Hat Linux 6.2 base).
Dual 550 MHz Pentium II Xeon CPUs, 1 GB of physical memory, 128 MB of
dedicated cache memory on the controller.

  We have multiple backups, so disaster recovery is taken care of -- but I
would like to avoid a disaster if I can.  :)  So...

  (1) Has anyone ever tried ext2resize on filesystems this large before?
  (2) Do the people familiar with ext2resize think it will work?
  (3) Any guesses on how long it will take?
  (4) Any tips on what I can do to make it go faster, given the large RAM
      size of the machine?
  (5) Are there any pitfalls I should be aware of?

  advTHANKSance!

-- 
Ben Scott           | Net Technologies, Inc.  | 978-462-8795
Network Engineer    | Salisbury, MA, USA      | 866-NTI-LINUX (684-5468)
bs...@nt... | http://www.ntilinux.com | Fax: 978-499-7839

On Oct 17, 2001  16:02 +0200, Jan Hanstede wrote:
> I have the following hd configuration:
> 
> Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/hda1             888M  808M   34M  96% /
> /dev/hda2             251M   31k  237M   1% /tmp
> /dev/hda4             2.7G  1.4G  1.2G  52% /var
> 
> I would like to increase the hd space on hda1 by eating some free space of
> hda4. I want to use ext2online for this purpose. (cause hda1 must stay
> mounted). However it don't seem to work. I thought I had to shrink hda4
> first and then grow hda1 with this new free space. But I don't seem to be
> able/allowed to shrink hda4. How can I solve this?

You need to use something like GNU parted.  ext2resize and ext2online only
are able to resize the end of the filesystem, and do not do anything with
the partition table.  GNU parted uses mostly the same code to resize the
ext2 filesystem, but it also allows you to move the entire filesystems
around and change the partitioning.

Another option would be to remove the /tmp filesystem (delete /dev/hda2)
and grow /dev/hda1 into this free space.  You can also use ext2resize
to shrink /var by 260MB+, then shrink /dev/hda4 by some smaller amount
and create a new partition at the end of the disk in this new space.
You need to reboot at that point to get the kernel to recognize the new
partition table, and finally, you grow / to fill the new space at the
end of /dev/hda1, and create a new /tmp filesystem in the space at the
end of the disk.  You will also need to grow /var again to use up the
space at the end of /dev/hda4.

If you decide to use parted, you cannot do any of this while the
filesystem is mounted.  However, that isn't a big deal because you need
a reboot anyways because the kernel isn't very good at handling partition
table changes when any partition of that disk is in use.

> By the way I didn't apply any kernel patches cause I didn't see any
> reference in the docs/faqs (I just installed some redhat rpms). I asume you
> don't need any unless you have an older version 2.2 or something? (I use >
> 2.4)?

You need to have kernel patches for any online resizing.  There are
patches for 2.4 kernels in the "patches/" directory.  I have added this
to the docs for installing ext2resize.

Note that ext2online is mosly useful when you have LVM - you can grow
the "partition" without needing a reboot, and LVM "partitions" do not
need to be contiguous on disk, so it is easy to add space to filesystems
while they are mounted.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
                 \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert

Hi,

I have the following hd configuration:

Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda1             888M  808M   34M  96% /
/dev/hda2             251M   31k  237M   1% /tmp
/dev/hda4             2.7G  1.4G  1.2G  52% /var

I would like to increase the hd space on hda1 by eating some free space of
hda4. I want to use
ext2online for this purpose. (cause hda1 must stay mounted).
However it don't seem to work. I thought I had to shrink hda4 first and then
grow hda1 with this new free space. But I don't seem to be able/allowed to
shrink hda4. How can I solve this?
By the way I didn't apply any kernel patches cause I didn't see any
reference in the docs/faqs (I just installed some redhat rpms). I asume you
don't need any unless you have an older version 2.2 or something? (I use >
2.4)?

Thanks!

On Oct 07, 2001  23:14 -0700, Kannan Ramanujam wrote:
> I work for an ISP in India and am currently working on LVM. 
> I was trying to install the ext2online package. I run a 2.4.0
> kernel in my test box.I have applied the patch that comes
> with the ext2resize-1.1.17.tar.gz for the 2.4.0 kernel.
> I had recompiled the kernel by enabling support for ext2 filesystem
> ..but still the ext2online command does not work.

You also need to enable the CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL option "enable support
for experimental options" under "Code maturity level", and CONFIG_EXT2_RESIZE
"Online ext2 resize support" in the filesystem options.

I have added these instructions for how to correctly recompile the kernel
to my CVS "INSTALL" document so it will be in the next release.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
                 \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert

Hi

please refer to my previous mail regarding the failure to get ext2online working.
I have sent in the output I got by running testresize.sh 
on my filesystem ..
I run a 2.4.0 kernel and i run ext2resize-1.1.16 ...

dumpe2fs 1.19, 13-Jul-2000 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09
TEST: ext2online on /dev/vg1/lv1 [ min 4096, current 512000, max 896000 ]
TEST: press <enter> to continue

TEST: resize from 512000 to 536186
ext2online v1.1.17 - 2001/03/18 for EXT2FS 0.5b
ext2_open
ext2_bcache_init
new filesystem size 536186
ext2_determine_itoffset
setting itoffset to +4
ext2_get_reserved

16 old groups, 1 blocks
17 new groups, 1 blocks
Filling last group to 524288 blocks
ext2online: resize failed while in kerneld =  0, newgd =  1)
ext2online: Invalid argument

using itoffset of 4
group has 11396 free blocks
group has 16000 free inodes (500 blocks)
clear/mark block bitmap 0x80000 used
clear/mark inode bitmap 0x80001 used
clear/mark inode blocks 0x80004-0x801f7 used
mark end blocks 0x82e7a-0x87fff used
mark 16768 unavailable end inodes used

ext2online: resizing to 536186 blocks
   ...flushing buffer 3/block 524289
Calling mount() for /dev/vg1/lv1(/var) with resize=536186
TEST: ext2online exited with 4
dumpe2fs 1.19, 13-Jul-2000 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09

i hope this helps in finding out the reason of the failure..

thanks in advance

regards
Kannan
-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through : http://mail.sify.com
Want to win a PC or Palm Tops or Digital Diaries or T-Shirts?
Click here http://promos.sify.com/niit/main.asp?mail

Hi

I work for an ISP in India and am currently working on LVM. I was trying to install the ext2online package. I run a 2.4.0 kernel in my test box.I have applied the patch that comes with the ext2resize-1.1.17.tar.gz for the 2.4.0 kernel. I had recompiled the kernel by enabling support for ext2 filesystem..but still the ext2online command does not work.I have attached the error on the stdout..it would be great if i get some help from anybody on this..
I think i have not recompiled the kernel properly.can I get some help with the steps i need to follow to get this working or atleast the correct way to recompile.

[root@mailtech linux]# ext2online /dev/vg1/lv1 2000M

ext2online v1.1.17 - 2001/03/18 for EXT2FS 0.5b

ext2online: resizing to 512000 blocks
ext2online: resize failed while in kernel
ext2online: Invalid argument

regards
Kannan
-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through : http://mail.sify.com
Want to win a PC or Palm Tops or Digital Diaries or T-Shirts?
Click here http://promos.sify.com/niit/main.asp?mail

You write:
> Hi I have a single drive running open bsd 2.9

Hmm.  You know that ext2resize only resizes ext2 filesystems?  I think
BSD is using FFS or some other type of filesystem than ext2, so it will
not work in this case.

> I want to enlarge /home and and shrink /usr
> /home i believe is /dev/hda6
> /usr is /dev/hda5
> will this work out? I'm worried since it says in the manual that to enlarge
> a partition i must keep the same start cylinder....

The same is true with shrinking - you need to keep the same starting
cylinder as well.

> I'm not exactly sure that /home and /usr partitions are /dev/hda6 and
> /dev/hda5 but they could be... 

That is not a good sign, if you're not sure which one is which.  You
can use "mount" to show which partitions are mounted where.  Of course
under BSD I think the devices have different names as well.

> also there might be partitions inbetween the /home and /usr partitions..
> is it still feasible to resize partitions shrinking one and enlarging the
> other?

This will definitely not work, because DOS-style partitions need to be
one "chunk" of disk space (i.e. contiguous).  I think BSD has "vinum"
which is a volume manager, and allows you to do things like that.  I
don't know if you can upgrade-in-place from DOS partitions to vinum.

In any case, before you do ANYTHING, you should make a full backup of
your disk, or you risk destroying everything, especially since you are
not exactly sure of your disk layout.

You may also want to look at the GNU parted tool, because I think it
handles BSD/DOS partitions (I don't know if it does BSD FFS resizing
or not).

Cheers, Andreas
-- 
Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
                 \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert

Hi I have a single drive running open bsd 2.9
I want to enlarge /home and and shrink /usr
/home i believe is /dev/hda6
/usr is /dev/hda5
will this work out? I'm worried since it says in the manual that to =
enlarge a partition i must keep the same start cylinder....

I'm not exactly sure that /home and /usr partitions are /dev/hda6 and =
/dev/hda5 but they could be...=20
also there might be partitions inbetween the /home and /usr partitions.. =
is it still feasible to resize partitions shrinking one and enlarging =
the other?

Many thanks for any response.

Martin writes:
> Simple question, below is what I've got now :
> 
> [root@dagma /root]# df -h
> Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/sda8             251M  131M  107M  55% /
> /dev/sda1              23M  4.3M   17M  20% /boot
> /dev/sda6             3.8G  1.3G  2.3G  36% /home
> /dev/sda5             3.8G  2.7G 1004M  73% /usr
> /dev/sda7             251M  137M  101M  58% /var
> 
> The problem is with sending mail becouse the /var partition is to small.
> I'd like to extend it with some space (let's say 1Gb) taken from /home.

You send > 100MB emails?

> How to do it in most safest way. I've got RH7.1 with etx2resize latest
> version installed from rpm.

Because you are running on DOS partitions, then you probably want to use
GNU parted (which uses the ext2resize code).  It will also handle the
needed changes to the partition table, which ext2resize will not.  If
you are using something like LVM, then it is a lot easier.

> Is it posiblle to do it through internet ? My server is about 30 miles away
> from me :-))

Maybe yes, maybe no.  If you are able to directly log in as root, then you
will be able to unmount /home (you may need to change /etc/ssh/sshd_config
to allow direct root login).

You need to shut down all unnecessary services to make /var unmountable.
You can use "lsof" to see which processes have files open in /var.

Good luck.

Cheers, Andreas
-- 
Andreas Dilger
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/

Dear ALL !

Simple question, below is what I've got now :

[root@dagma /root]# df -h
Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda8             251M  131M  107M  55% /
/dev/sda1              23M  4.3M   17M  20% /boot
/dev/sda6             3.8G  1.3G  2.3G  36% /home
/dev/sda5             3.8G  2.7G 1004M  73% /usr
/dev/sda7             251M  137M  101M  58% /var

The problem is with sending mail becouse the /var partition is to small.
I'd like to extend it with some space (let's say 1Gb) taken from
/home.
How to do it in most safest way. I've got RH7.1 with etx2resize latest
version installed from rpm.
Is it posiblle to do it through internet ? My server is about 30 miles away
from me :-))

Thanks,

Martin

Dear ALL !

Simple question, below is what I've got now :

[root@dagma /root]# df -h
Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda8             251M  131M  107M  55% /
/dev/sda1              23M  4.3M   17M  20% /boot
/dev/sda6             3.8G  1.3G  2.3G  36% /home
/dev/sda5             3.8G  2.7G 1004M  73% /usr
/dev/sda7             251M  137M  101M  58% /var

The problem is with sending mail becouse the /var partition is to small.
I'd like to extend it with some space (let's say 1Gb) taken from
/home.
How to do it in most safest way. I've got RH7.1 with etx2resize latest
version installed from rpm.
Is it posiblle to do it through internet ? My server is about 30 miles away
from me :-))

Thanks,

Martin

Shea A Martin wrote:
> as root :
> umount /home
> ext2resize -v /dev/hda3 10g
> 
> looks like something is happening, as ext2resize gives output.
> when I go into fdisk, I see that nothing has changed.  I tried changing
> 10g to 6g or 1000000 or whatever, but nothing changes in fdisk.  I have
> tried dos fdisk and the fdisk which comes with potatoe.

ext2resize doesn't modify the partition table (but Parted does)
You have to do that yourself with ext2resize.

> when I run 'parted' I get
> Warning: The operating system thinks the geometry on /dev/hda is
> 2482/255/63.
> You should check that this matches the BIOS geometry before using this
> program.
> 
> should I worry about this???

No.

Andrew Clausen

2000	Jan	Feb	Mar (8)	Apr (1)	May	Jun (3)	Jul	Aug	Sep (6)	Oct	Nov (5)	Dec (2)
2001	Jan	Feb	Mar (6)	Apr (2)	May	Jun	Jul (3)	Aug (2)	Sep	Oct (5)	Nov (5)	Dec
2002	Jan (14)	Feb (8)	Mar (5)	Apr	May	Jun	Jul (3)	Aug (3)	Sep (12)	Oct (12)	Nov (10)	Dec (10)
2003	Jan	Feb (7)	Mar (1)	Apr (6)	May (3)	Jun	Jul (3)	Aug (3)	Sep (2)	Oct (4)	Nov (1)	Dec (2)
2004	Jan (3)	Feb (2)	Mar	Apr	May	Jun (1)	Jul (2)	Aug	Sep (2)	Oct	Nov	Dec
2005	Jan (2)	Feb	Mar	Apr	May (2)	Jun	Jul	Aug (14)	Sep (4)	Oct	Nov	Dec (5)
2006	Jan	Feb (4)	Mar (19)	Apr (1)	May (9)	Jun (34)	Jul	Aug (1)	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec