1

I have the following Centos 7 system that I inherited. Here's the disk setup:

# lsblk NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT sda 8:0 0 931.5G 0 disk ├─sda1 8:1 0 200M 0 part /boot/efi ├─sda2 8:2 0 1G 0 part /boot └─sda3 8:3 0 930.3G 0 part ├─cl-root 253:0 0 50G 0 lvm / ├─cl-swap 253:1 0 3.9G 0 lvm [SWAP] └─cl-home 253:2 0 876.4G 0 lvm /home sdb 8:16 0 3.7T 0 disk └─sdb1 8:17 0 3.7T 0 part └─crypt1 253:4 0 3.7T 0 crypt /mount1 sdc 8:32 0 12.8T 0 disk └─crypt2 253:3 0 12.8T 0 crypt /mount2 sdd 8:48 0 2.7T 0 disk └─crypt3 253:5 0 2.7T 0 crypt /mount3

Note that everything is working fine, and all the crypt disks open fine and are fully accessible. My question is more about tidyness: Note that disk sdb has a partition defined whereas sdc and sdd do not. Is this a "problem" in any way shape or form (e.g. security)? Should sdc and sdd have partitions too? Or is this something that I can continue to ignore?

Improve this question
1
  • I would be more concerned about naming block devices "crypt1" (well duh, I can see its encrypted, who will I ask if I ever need the keys?) and the kitchen sink assortment of disks that makes me wonder if its mirrored by another kitchen sink assortment of backup scripts that grew over time but never properly backups everything. Commented Dec 26, 2020 at 4:06

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

You may ignore it. sdc and sdd are block devices, so you can encrypt them or build file systems on them the same as sdb1.

Partitioning adds flexibility or course. But you can also get that by adding the disks to an LVM storage pool.

Note, I'm not able to immediately find any documentation about this. So take it with a grain of salt. But it's always been my understanding, and I've used unpartitioned disks without any trouble.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.