Re: GEOM_PART: a quick update on logical partitions

From: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt_at_mac.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:06:13 -0800
On Feb 3, 2009, at 11:27 PM, Martin wrote:

> Am Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:30:14 -0800
> schrieb Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt_at_mac.com>:
>
>>> Then, it is quite unusual to insert a new logical partition and copy
>>> all entries in the list one place down.
>>
>> What do you mean copy?
>
> I try to figure out why you think that the device names will change,
> when you simply use the offset in the partition list.

Please read:
	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_partition

and then explain what you mean.

> Ok, so when you have logical partition 0, 1 and 2.
>
> /dev/ad0s1.0
> /dev/ad0s1.1
> /dev/ad0s1.2
>
> you can remove partitions 0 and 1, and you get:
>
> /dev/ad0s1.2

No, you have 0.

> now you can insert 0 again and you get:
>
> /dev/ad0s1.0
> /dev/ad0s1.2

You'll have 0 and 1.

> You can still use softlinks here. In the last situation you would get
> ad0s5 and ad0s7. Do I forget about something?

Yes. Consider adding 4 logical partitions in the
space freed up by removing the first 2. What was
the third partition in your example then becomes
the 5th. How do you want to deal with that if
you use "the offset".

> I see. But you have to be aware that you create a special case here.
> Someone who starts "geli journal ad0s5" won't get "ad0s5.journal".

True.

>
>
> And is it really a good idea to have the partition block number
> for the suffix?

Seems the best so far.

> Imagine you use gpart or partition magic to move all
> partitions 1GB down, for example to enlarge the file system on the  
> first
> primary partition. You would need to figure out each logical partition
> block number of the extended partition to fix the situation,

No, they are relative.

-- 
Marcel Moolenaar
xcllnt_at_mac.com
Received on Wed Feb 04 2009 - 07:06:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:41 UTC