[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: partitioning a hardware RAID



On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 04:57:57PM -0400, Warren Lamboy wrote:
> "fdisk -l" tells me that I have the following device:
> 
> Disk /dev/sda:  733.4 GB, 733468426240 bytes
> 255 heads, 63 sector/track, 89172 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
> 
> Device    Boot     Start       End      Blocks     Id       System
> 
> /dev/sda1              1        5       40131      de      Dell Utility
> /dev/sda2   *          6       18      104422+     83      Linux
> /dev/sda3             19    17580   141066765      83      Linux
> /dev/sda4          17581    17834     2040255       f      Win95 Ext'd
> (LBA)
> /dev/sda5          17581    17834     2040223+     82      Linux swap
> 
> 
> The size of the device in GB is about what I expected, so I think the
> hardware
> is set up okay and Linux recognizes it correctly.  
> 
> I have been asked to add one new partition to this "drive" that uses all
> of
> the free space.  If I understand correctly, I need to add a new
> partition,
> /dev/sda6, starting at 17835 and ending at 89172 with Id = 83 and System
> =
> Linux, and should be able to use fdisk to do that.  I think I understand
> fdisk well enough to do this.  However, I still have a couple of
> questions:

> 1.  Do I need to reboot the system into "rescue" mode to do this?
> Can't I just use fdisk on a running machine as long as I don't mess up
> the existing partitions?  Various documents I find about adding
> partitions suggest that I must boot into rescue mode to use fdisk for
> this.

You do not need to boot from a rescue disk.  Do the following:
# fdisk /dev/sda
and ask for help (I haven't got time to go through all the steps right
now to verify each command).  You will add a new partition and select
the default start and end block.  Type 83 is right.  Write the partition
table and exit.

> 2.  My reading of the table above indicates that the swap partition
> overlaps with the extended partition.  Am I interpreting this
> correctly?  If I am, is this arrangement normal?  Is it desirable?
> Does it cause any potential problems?

That's normal - don't worry about it.  You can have only 4 primary
partitions on a disk.

-- 
Ed Wilts, RHCE
Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:ewilts ewilts org
Member #1, Red Hat Community Ambassador Program



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]