FAQ
I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
to a large (1.5TB) disk,
as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

Both disks are Western Digital,
and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
the original disk, and I'm not sure
from the documentation if True Image allows this.

Any opinions on the better of the two?

--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

Search Discussions

  • Les Mikesell at Sep 27, 2010 at 5:42 pm

    On 9/27/2010 4:27 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
    I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
    to a large (1.5TB) disk,
    as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

    Both disks are Western Digital,
    and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
    I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

    My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
    the original disk, and I'm not sure
    from the documentation if True Image allows this.

    Any opinions on the better of the two?
    Don't know much about Acronis but clonezilla should do the job as long
    as it is able to read the used blocks on the source and you don't mind
    the copy having the same partition sizes initially (you can resize or
    add the unused space as a new mounted partition afterward).

    --
    Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com
  • John R Pierce at Sep 27, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    On 09/27/10 2:27 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
    I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
    to a large (1.5TB) disk,
    as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

    Both disks are Western Digital,
    and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
    I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

    My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
    the original disk, and I'm not sure
    from the documentation if True Image allows this.

    Any opinions on the better of the two?
    is this ext3fs ? use dump ... | restore ...
  • Les Mikesell at Sep 27, 2010 at 5:52 pm

    On 9/27/2010 4:45 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
    On 09/27/10 2:27 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
    I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
    to a large (1.5TB) disk,
    as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

    Both disks are Western Digital,
    and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
    I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

    My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
    the original disk, and I'm not sure
    from the documentation if True Image allows this.

    Any opinions on the better of the two?
    is this ext3fs ? use dump ... | restore ...
    If it is bootable, then he has to go through some contortions to install
    grub (besides the extra effort of making the partitions and filesystems
    that the imaging toolsets do for you).

    --
    Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com
  • Jerry McAllister at Sep 27, 2010 at 6:07 pm

    On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 04:52:58PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
    On 9/27/2010 4:45 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
    On 09/27/10 2:27 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
    I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
    to a large (1.5TB) disk,
    as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

    Both disks are Western Digital,
    and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
    I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

    My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
    the original disk, and I'm not sure
    from the documentation if True Image allows this.

    Any opinions on the better of the two?
    is this ext3fs ? use dump ... | restore ...
    If it is bootable, then he has to go through some contortions to install
    grub (besides the extra effort of making the partitions and filesystems
    that the imaging toolsets do for you).
    Those are not difficult and allow for a proper use of the
    larger space.

    ////jerry

    --
    Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com
    _______________________________________________
    CentOS mailing list
    CentOS at centos.org
    http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
  • Jerry McAllister at Sep 27, 2010 at 6:05 pm

    On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 10:27:00PM +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:

    I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
    to a large (1.5TB) disk,
    as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

    Both disks are Western Digital,
    and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
    I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

    My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
    the original disk, and I'm not sure
    from the documentation if True Image allows this.

    Any opinions on the better of the two?
    I would be inclined to suggest regular UNIX dump/restore.
    The size change is covered in normal UNIX fashion and all
    links, ownership, permissions and flags are preserved properly.

    ////jerry

    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
    tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

    _______________________________________________
    CentOS mailing list
    CentOS at centos.org
    http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
  • Timothy Murphy at Sep 28, 2010 at 11:27 am

    Jerry McAllister wrote:

    I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
    to a large (1.5TB) disk,
    as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

    Both disks are Western Digital,
    and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
    I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

    My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
    the original disk, and I'm not sure
    from the documentation if True Image allows this.

    Any opinions on the better of the two?
    I would be inclined to suggest regular UNIX dump/restore.
    The size change is covered in normal UNIX fashion and all
    links, ownership, permissions and flags are preserved properly.
    I should have admitted that there is a Windows partition on the old disk.
    It came with the machine, but I never use it.
    However, I would like to save it if possible,
    as there seem to be some operations on this computer (HP ProLiant M110),
    eg updating the BIOS, which seem to require Windows to be running.


    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
    tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
  • Les Mikesell at Sep 28, 2010 at 11:48 am

    On 9/28/2010 10:27 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
    Jerry McAllister wrote:
    I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
    to a large (1.5TB) disk,
    as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

    Both disks are Western Digital,
    and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
    I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

    My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
    the original disk, and I'm not sure
    from the documentation if True Image allows this.

    Any opinions on the better of the two?
    I would be inclined to suggest regular UNIX dump/restore.
    The size change is covered in normal UNIX fashion and all
    links, ownership, permissions and flags are preserved properly.
    I should have admitted that there is a Windows partition on the old disk.
    It came with the machine, but I never use it.
    However, I would like to save it if possible,
    as there seem to be some operations on this computer (HP ProLiant M110),
    eg updating the BIOS, which seem to require Windows to be running.
    If you know how to reinstall the multi-boot setup, you should be able to
    use clonezilla-live to clone specific partitions and either reinstall
    others or use a file oriented copy technique. And if you have another
    machine or disk to hold the image you can make a compressed image file
    copy as a backup in case your drive dies before you decide how you want
    to set up the replacement.

    --
    Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com
  • Timothy Murphy at Sep 28, 2010 at 8:42 pm

    Les Mikesell wrote:

    If you know how to reinstall the multi-boot setup, you should be able to
    use clonezilla-live to clone specific partitions and either reinstall
    others or use a file oriented copy technique. And if you have another
    machine or disk to hold the image you can make a compressed image file
    copy as a backup in case your drive dies before you decide how you want
    to set up the replacement.
    Yes, thanks for all your help.

    I have decided to use clonezilla,
    as I discovered on further reading about Acronis WD version
    that "clone" for them means "clone a whole disk";
    and I couldn't find any firm statement that this operation
    actually left anything on the source disk.
    (They use the term "transfer" throughout.)

    I found the Acronis documentation hard to follow;
    but to be fair Clonezilla documentation is fairly obscure too.

    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
    tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
  • Scott Silva at Sep 28, 2010 at 11:48 am

    on 9-28-2010 8:27 AM Timothy Murphy spake the following:
    Jerry McAllister wrote:
    I want to clone a small (80GB) disk on my CentOS server
    to a large (1.5TB) disk,
    as smart has been giving me warnings of unreadable sectors.

    Both disks are Western Digital,
    and WD has a WD version of Acronis True Image.
    I'm not sure whether to use this or Clonezilla.

    My worry with Acronis is that I want to keep
    the original disk, and I'm not sure
    from the documentation if True Image allows this.

    Any opinions on the better of the two?
    I would be inclined to suggest regular UNIX dump/restore.
    The size change is covered in normal UNIX fashion and all
    links, ownership, permissions and flags are preserved properly.
    I should have admitted that there is a Windows partition on the old disk.
    It came with the machine, but I never use it.
    However, I would like to save it if possible,
    as there seem to be some operations on this computer (HP ProLiant M110),
    eg updating the BIOS, which seem to require Windows to be running.
    All the HP servers I have are fully update able from linux... I don't have a
    M110, but I have several ML350's
  • Timothy Murphy at Sep 28, 2010 at 8:53 pm

    Scott Silva wrote:

    I should have admitted that there is a Windows partition on the old disk.
    It came with the machine, but I never use it.
    However, I would like to save it if possible,
    as there seem to be some operations on this computer (HP ProLiant M110),
    eg updating the BIOS, which seem to require Windows to be running.
    All the HP servers I have are fully update able from linux... I don't have
    a M110, but I have several ML350's
    Sorry, I was talking nonsense.
    I have two servers (in different locations), both running CentOS-5.5.
    One is an HP ProLiant,
    but the one with the bad disk is actually a Dell PowerEdge T105.
    The information that came with this explicitly warns
    against using Linux to update the BIOS.
    (The machine actually came with a curious mixture of Windows and Linux,
    in the form of a partial RedHat Enterprise system.)
    Also the Western Digital disk software
    all seems to assume the the machine is running under Windows.
    (Admittedly it didn't tell me anything more than smart under CentOS.)


    --
    Timothy Murphy
    e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
    tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
    s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
  • Scott Silva at Sep 29, 2010 at 7:12 pm

    on 9-28-2010 5:53 PM Timothy Murphy spake the following:
    Scott Silva wrote:
    I should have admitted that there is a Windows partition on the old disk.
    It came with the machine, but I never use it.
    However, I would like to save it if possible,
    as there seem to be some operations on this computer (HP ProLiant M110),
    eg updating the BIOS, which seem to require Windows to be running.
    All the HP servers I have are fully update able from linux... I don't have
    a M110, but I have several ML350's
    Sorry, I was talking nonsense.
    I have two servers (in different locations), both running CentOS-5.5.
    One is an HP ProLiant,
    but the one with the bad disk is actually a Dell PowerEdge T105.
    The information that came with this explicitly warns
    against using Linux to update the BIOS.
    (The machine actually came with a curious mixture of Windows and Linux,
    in the form of a partial RedHat Enterprise system.)
    Also the Western Digital disk software
    all seems to assume the the machine is running under Windows.
    (Admittedly it didn't tell me anything more than smart under CentOS.)
    If you really NEED windows for systems like this there is a tool out there to
    make a complete windows environment that boots from a CD or USB key...
    ubcd4win.com That way you can have the server clean and still use the tools

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupcentos @
categoriescentos
postedSep 27, '10 at 5:27p
activeSep 29, '10 at 7:12p
posts12
users5
websitecentos.org
irc#centos

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase