David Boccabella wrote:
> What I have done for my system configuration is to have 2
> HD's. The system is split so that the '/home' is on a 30 gig
> HD and the base op system is on another 4 gig HD.
> I did this as a protection again HD failure etc so that most
> of the user information can be protected.
I don't see how splitting your data and system files onto 2 drives protects your data against HD failure and gives you more protection than what you have if they are on 1 drive.
If you really are concerned about data integrity, you should install 2 hard disks in RAID1 (5.5 supports software RAID1). All you will need is a matching 30Gb drive.
Backup all your data using tape, backup to desktop (where data < 2Gb) or backup2ws, then configure the box with new drive, do a new install as RAID1 and then restore your data and load any additional rpms previously installed (with /home and other system folders on the one (RAID) drive).
You will then have true data redundancy and hard drive redundancy.
> I need to find out what will happen when I do the upgrade of
> 5.5 on this evironment.
From what I read in these forums sme server is really designed for data all on the one drive (or pair of drives), and doing a instal to multiple drives will give an inconsistent result. Generally the second drive is added after an instal is done, so perhaps you should follow the same procedure as you did before.
> 5.5 will also move some of the user's MAIL directories around
> so that if the upgrade is done only on the ROOT HD without
> mounting the USER HD then I will have to upgrade the user's
> area manually.
That would appear to be the most likely scenario.
I would disconnect a second drive before doing an upgrade to prevent data loss.
> I'd hate to have my system down for longer than necessary as it really
> is the hub of my business
If it is that important you should set up a test server configured identically to your production server and then try the upgrade on the test box first.
Regards
Ray Mitchell