Fun exercise!
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Here is a fun exercise for all of you, /g/!
> Grab your favorite virtualization software. (VirtualBox and KVM are both free!)
> Grab Ubuntu 16.04 for example
> Add two virtual drives to the machine
It sounds fucking simple, but it isn't.
LVM? LVM will cry that it can't find the group.
Normal RAID? It will cry that root cannot be found.
So, hurry up, let's see who wins!
Here is the LVM version.
It goes like this:
> Go into installer
> Set up software raid
> Set up LVM on that one partition
> Boot
> Remove drive
> Get this
Aaand this is the no LVM version.
You make your partitions on both drives, same size, same all. Then hit the Raid options.
> Mirror each partition RAID1, one by one
> Boot up
> Remove one drive
> Get this
> inb4 Google
Son, I did. Try it.
> inb4 Just use Windows
Yes, on Windows it takes you, 4 clicks to do RAID1, and it WILL boot if you lose one drive. It's fucking magic. But, Windows is not available on most VPS platforms. And it cannot really work under 1GB of ram either.
> inb4 forgot GRUB install
No, it's there. GRUB loads, root device fails after.
I'm way too lazy to actually try this. But if it's happening in both KVM and in Virtualbox, it's probably something either you or the Ubuntu installer did wrong. I've found that Linux installers usually shit the bed when it comes to RAID so just do it manually.
uh dude you're doing it wrong if you're trying to RAID a virtualized disks
>>55397324
>But, Windows is not available on most VPS platforms
Why the hell are you trying to RAID on a VPS? That is the stupidest shit. I assumed you were doing it for school/practice or something.
Think of it this way: Your VPS provider stores your data. It's up to them to RAID the physical disks. If they didn't, then all your data would just be one one drive, and even if you had virtualized RAID, you'd lose all your data when that disk died.
I think you need the server edition of Ubuntu to use RAID, i don't know about LVM.
>>55397510
No it happens on a real machine, on a rented real machine, and in virtual machines. This is like "default behavior".
>>55397524
?
>>55397560
Don't mix the VPS into this. I meant that as a compliment to Linux that it can run on low end hardware. I want to install it in a real environment, and I used Linux for years, and I have several servers running, but most uses HWRaid, or just virtualized single disks.
So... how do I fix this?
>>55398000
The only difference is the installer, the Server Edition is basically a CLI installer, like the one you get in Debian. And I used that one, of course, but this is what you get.
>>55397524
>>55397560
So for the "real deal", I have an Intel Atom ghetto server for you know, home use. I set up the RAID1 just like I showed you, and once you pull the main drive, it won't boot anymore.
Same error even, just like in VMware.
I used VMware for testing, so those are vmware screenshots, but this should work on any platform. The disks are disks, there is no difference.
If you Google around there are tons of tickets blaming mdadm, lvm packages, scripts, whatever. But there is no clear solution.
>>55397223
>using software raid as you boot
jesus christ is it retard day or something? fucking kill yourself please
I think you need to set partition type to 0xFD for kernel autodetect to works.
By default it use software (user-space) autodetect.
>>55398505
So that is what your dad threw at your head last night. Alright. I am sorry for that.
How about you get a nice tripcode, my newfriend, and let us filter you? I mean, you can still post edgy replies, and it will bother no one. It's a win-win?
>>55398581
Hmm. I will check.
But Grub works perfectly, it's as if the kernel / system is looking for a given identifier.
Let's say, root=/dev/sda.
Having two /boot on each drive without raid also sounds dumb, because then you would need to raid the contents of both by hand, or dd, I mean it's literally raid1. By hand.
>>55398617
Of course it will boot, but the kernel won't assemble the raid for you.
On older Linux, this is done automatically.
But on newer Linux, the recommended approach is to make your own initramfs script.
That or use 0xfd partition type to revert to old style.
https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/RAID_Boot
>>55398617
nobody's fault that you're so stupid except your own
>>55398691
I see, thanks.
> On older Linux this is done automatically
That's a nice trend, really.
>>55397223
um, just use btrfs you retard
What enclosures do you guys use/recommend?
>>55397223 It just werks
>>55400382 And here is broken one.
