HT2434 Logical Volume - should show (locked) in sys. profile?

I recently confirmed the GUID partition scheme- did a wipe, a re-install. I have to enter a disk password, then the passord for the account.
Logical Volume:
  Revertible:          No
  Encrypted:          Yes
  Encryption Type:          AES-XTS
  Locked:          No   [ is this right? ]
  LV UUID: ----
Still showing the old (original?)
Logical Volume Group:
  Name:          7TH COMPANY
  Size:          119.17 GB (119,174,365,184 bytes)
  Free Space:          Zero KB
  LVG UUID: -----
Hope that my SSD is working properly - that as well as the DISK UTILITY ? Although, I am not a expert user either!!

It's not clear what the problem is. "Locked: No" means that the volume encryption key is cached in memory.

Similar Messages

  • Logical volume activation during bootup shows "Maps lock" errors

    this started happening sometime after the creation of two lvm snapshots (including 1 root volume snapshot which, as i have since read, may be an issue) but this has never happened to me before in conjunction with snapshotting.  the following outputs before the system successfully finishes booting:
    :: Running Hook [lvm2]
    device-mapper: uevent: version 1.0.3
    device-mapper: ioctl: 4.15.0-ioctl (2009-04-01) initialised:
    Scanning logical volumes...
    Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while...
    Found volume group "a1vg1" using metadata type lvm2
    Activating logical volumes...
    Internal error: Maps lock 14528512 < unlock 14532608
    Internal error: Maps lock 14548992 < unlock 14553088
    this is annoying but beyond that seems innocuous enough.  the system is stable.  can anyone tell me what this error means or refer me to the proper documentation?
    TIA

    I have also these messages. It had gone away, but few days ago it came back ...

  • How does logical volume helps in performance in AIX..Should have posted IBM

    We are setting up a new DB server and the disks are in RAID5 config,Does putting data and index in different logical volumes helps in performance

    (I hope I'm not falling for April Fools joke here...)
    Hi Maran,
    As someone already answered, if both volumes are striped against all available disks, you can put everything in one volume and expect equal or better performance.
    However, I want to warn you from optimizing the disk structure without knowing that your database will really bottleneck on disk access to index and data blocks. My storage manager and I wasted countless hours with such optimizations before realizing that we are wasting our time because the application code contains so many functions that disk IO is not even close to being an issue.
    -- Chen

  • OSX Yosemite Logical Volume Group - FIX!

    Hey guys,
    For anyone wondering or concerned about why, when entering Disk Utility, the SSD name has been changed and you now see Macintosh HD and Macintosh HD below. The one above is listed as a Logical Volume Group with an "online" status while the one below that is your physical HDD (so normal as with previous OS's.
    I must note that I do not have any recovery partition when holding option when booting (after installing straight onto Mavericks, nor when making my own bootable copy).
    However, I did find a way to fix the Hard Drive name issue and revert it back to original format (I did find this fix online, and it has worked for me).
    I included pictures below as well.
    First one shows original Yosemite SSD name change (from Apple SSD to Macintosh HD with 18.9MB available)
    Second shows your normal HHD name unchanged.
    Go to Terminal and enter the following:
    diskutil cs list
    then you will see a bunch of volumes jump up
    enter: diskutil cs revert "UUID"
    under "UUID", enter the the Logical Volume code number without brackets.
    Do not copy and paste it from terminal into your new terminal line. Write it out.
    Hit enter and it will ask to reboot your Mac.
    Once, rebooted, your old SSD/HDD name with reappear as in Mavericks.
    My entire terminal line is shown in the picture attached.
    Either way (SSD name changed or reverted) did not changed how the system performed. Everything is running as it should.
    Final result shown in last picture!
    Hopefully this is just a bug that Apple will fix.
    Please ignore the DiskMaker drive (I was making a bootable copy on my external!!)

    Thanks for the tip. I see its a common trouble. But i stuck a problem that cannot be solved with this method cause i dont have revertable logic volume.
    SO i cannot install system now. There's  no visible disk any more.

  • Logical Volume Group.

    My 1TB SSD main drive on my MBP Retina volume has changed to Logical Volume Group and the Partition is named Logical Partition.  Now it works fine but was wondering why it has changed from Mac OS Extended (Journaled).  If I want to partition the drive, it is grayed out with no options.  I'm not pleased that I can't control my own drive.  Any answers?

    FileVault is not activated, although it was at one point.  I deleted the partition and...
    I believe that may have caused the problem when I attempted to load the operating system on a new partition from the drive.  I deleted it and thought I reformatted it to Mac OS Extended, but I had major issues because it was locked at one point.  Just recently, I restored to a TM backup which should have formatted the drive correctly but this is what I ended up with.  Like I said, the option is grayed out now.
    Gary

  • Unix layout question  single vs. multiple logical volumes

    Hello friends,
    I have a question which I have seen various points of view. I'm hoping you might be able to give me a better insight so I can either confirm my own sanity, or accept a new paradigm shift in laying out the file system for best performance.
    Here are the givens:
    Unix systems (AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, and/or Linux).
    Hardware RAID system on large SAN (in this case, RAID-05 striped over more than 100 physical disks).
    (We are using AIX 6.1 with CIO turned on for the database files).
    Each Physical Volume is literally striped over at least physical 100 disks (spindles).
    Each Logical Volume is also striped over at least 100 spindles (all the same spindles for each lvol).
    Oracle software binaries are on their own separate physical volume.
    Oracle backups, exports, flash-back-query, etc., are on their own separate physical volume.
    Oracle database files, including all tablespaces, redo logs, undo ts, temp ts, and control files are in their own separate physical volume (that is made up of logical volumes that are each striped over at least 100 physical disks (spindles).
    The question is if it makes any sense (and WHY) to break up the physical volume that is used for the Oracle database files themselves, into multiple logical volumes? At what point does it make sense to create individual logical volumes for each datafile, or type, or put them all in a single logical volume?
    Does this do anything at all for performance? If the volumes are logical, then what difference would it to put them into individual logical volumes that are striped across the same one-hundred (+) disks?
    Basically ALL database files are in a single physical volume (LUN), but does it help (and WHY) to break up the physical volume into several logical volumes for placing each of the individual data files (e.g., separating system ts, from sysaux, from temp, from undo, from data, from indexes, etc.) if the physical volume is created on a RAID-5 (or RAID-10) disk array on a SAN that literally spans across hundreds of high-speed disks?
    If this does makes sense, why?
    From a physical standpoint, there are only 4 hardware paths for each LUN, so what difference does it make to create multiple 'logical' volumes for each datafile, or for separating types of data files?
    From an I/O standpoint, the multi-threading of the operating system should only be able to use the number of pathways that are capable based on the various operating system options (e.g., multicore CPUs using SMT (simultaneous multipath threading). But I believe they are still based on physical paths, not based on logical volumes.
    I look forward to hearing back from you.
    Thanks.
    ji li

    Thanks for your reply damorgan.
    We have dual HBAs in our servers as standard equipment, along with dual controllers.
    I totally agree with the idea of getting rid of RAID-5, but that is not my choice.
    We have a very large (massive) data center and the decision to use RAID-5 was at the discretion of our unix team some time ago. Their idea is one-size-fits-all. When I questioned it, I was balked at. After all, what do I know? I've only been a sys admin for 10 years (but on HP-UX and Solaris, not on AIX), and I've only been an Oracle DBA for nearly 20 years.
    For whatever it is worth, they also mirror their RAID-5, so in essence, it is a RAID 5-1-0 (RAID-50).
    Anyway, as for the hardware paths, from my understanding, there are only 4 physical hardware paths going from the servers to the switches, to the SAN and back. Their claim (the unix team's) is that by using multiple logical volumes within a single physical volume, that it increases the number of 'threads' to pull data from the stripe. This is the part I don't understand and may be specific to AIX.
    So if each logical volume is a stripe within a physical volume, and each physical volume is striped across more than one hundred disks, I still don't understand how multiple logical volumes can increase I/O through-put. From my understanding, if we only have four paths, and there are 100+ spindles, even if it did increase I/O somehow by the way AIX uses multipathing (SMT) with its CPUs, how can it have any affect on the I/O. And if it did, it would still have to be negligible.
    Two years ago, I've personally set up three LUNs on a pair of Sun V480s (RAC'd) connected to a Sun Storage 3510 SAN. One LUN for Oracle binaries, one for database datafiles, and one for backups and archivelogs), and then put all my datafiles in a single logical volume on one LUN, and had fantastic performance for a very intense database that literally had 12,000 to 16,000 simultaneous active* connections using Webshere connection pools. While that was a Sun system, and now I'm dealing with an AIX P6 570 system, I can't imagine the concepts being that much different, especially when the servers are basically comparable.
    Any comments or feedback appreciated.
    ji li
    Edited by: ji li on Jan 28, 2013 7:51 AM

  • Can't delete a logical volume group created from a blank disk image

    Hi all,
    I'm a recent convert from Windows, so do bear with me while I grapple with all the new terminology.
    Basically, here's the problem: I've been trying to create an encrypted drive and have been at it for a few hours now. I ended up with two 'logical volume groups' created from blank disk images, neither of which are password-protected, and one of which I quite stupidly named "hidden folder" and can't rename now. Anyways, I decided to throw it all away and start right from scratch, but now disk utility won't let me delete these two logical volume groups despite me dismounting both devices, trying to trash the containing folder, etc. Some searching about online has gotten me into the belief that there should be an 'erase' tab in the disk utility window which is not showing up when I click on those drives (however, the erase tab does appear when I click on the indented partitions on each drive). Here's a screenshot to give you guys an idea:
    -Here's the disk utility window. The two drives I'm trying to get rid of are "Hidden Folder" and "HD2"
    -Here's what I suppose would be called the 'containing folder' in which both drives reside
    -And finally my setup, just in case it's relevant
    Oh and btw this would be my first post here! How exciting
    Thanks in advance,
    Arthur

    nidra wrote:
    When I right click on it these are the choices: Open; Move to Trash; Get Info; Compress...; Burn ... to disc; Duplicate; Make Alias; Copy ...; Clean Up Selection; Show view options; Label; Folder Actions Setup.
    That is as it should be. If you select "Move to Trash" does it move the folders to the trash? If so, do the following from my previous post:
    tjk wrote:
    1. Open Terminal (in Applications, Utilities).
    2. Copy and paste the following command into the Terminal window (or type it exactly as follows):
    sudo rm -rf ~/.Trash/*
    3. Press Return.
    4. Type in your password when asked (note: you will not see anything being entered as you type your password).
    5. Hit Return.
    6. Wait until the process finishes/the Terminal prompt returns.
    7. Quit Terminal.
    I wonder if I need to do some changes to the rights about doing this action "move to trash"?
    Run Repair Permissions in Disk Utility.
    this is making me very uncomfortable, I know myself to solve any problems I tackle/___sbsstatic___/migration-images/migration-img-not-avail.png Something so simple as this is making me crazy
    I don't know if it would make me any crazier than I am, but I sure wouldn't want a stray folder just hanging around on my desktop either.

  • Rename Logical Volume

    My unix sys admin wants to rename the Logical Volume ex: vghcmlog to
    vghcmprdlog. These volume groups are used to create ASM diskgroups.
    Please advise as an Oracle DBA, what should i do to reflect these changes.

    This discussion certainly belongs to in the Grid discussion group, not here. Use "alter diskgroup ... rename directory ... to ...".
    Daniel

  • Logical Volume Group and Logical Partition not matching up in free space

    I was dual booting Windows 7 and Mountain Lion. Through Disk Utility, I removed the Windows 7 Partition and expanded the HFS+ partition to encompass the entire hard drive. However, the Logical Volume Group does not think that I have that extra free space. The main problem is that I cannot resize my partition. I am wanting to dual boot Ubuntu with this. Any ideas? Any help is appreciated. I will post some screenshots with the details. Furthermore, here are some terminal commands I ran: /dev/disk0
    #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER
    0: GUID_partition_scheme *250.1 GB disk0
    1: EFI 209.7 MB disk0s1
    2: Apple_CoreStorage 249.2 GB disk0s2
    3: Apple_Boot Recovery HD 650.0 MB disk0s3
    /dev/disk1
    #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER
    0: Apple_HFS MAC OS X *248.9 GB disk1 Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on
    /dev/disk1 243031288 153028624 89746664 64% 38321154 22436666 63% /
    devfs 189 189 0 100% 655 0 100% /dev
    map -hosts 0 0 0 100% 0 0 100% /net
    map auto_home 0 0 0 100% 0 0 100% /home CoreStorage logical volume groups (1 found)
    |
    +-- Logical Volume Group 52A4D825-B134-4C33-AC8B-39A02BA30522
    =========================================================
    Name: MAC OS X
    Size: 249199587328 B (249.2 GB)
    Free Space: 16777216 B (16.8 MB)
    |
    +-< Physical Volume 6D7A0A36-1D86-4A30-8EB5-755D375369D9
    | ----------------------------------------------------
    | Index: 0
    | Disk: disk0s2
    | Status: Online
    | Size: 249199587328 B (249.2 GB)
    |
    +-> Logical Volume Family FDC4568F-4E25-46AB-885A-CBA6287309B6
    Encryption Status: Unlocked
    Encryption Type: None
    Conversion Status: Converting
    Conversion Direction: backward
    Has Encrypted Extents: Yes
    Fully Secure: No
    Passphrase Required: No
    |
    +-> Logical Volume BB2662B7-58F3-401C-B889-F264D79E68B4
    Disk: disk1
    Status: Online
    Size (Total): 248864038912 B (248.9 GB)
    Size (Converted): 130367356928 B (130.4 GB)
    Revertible: Yes (unlock and decryption required)
    LV Name: MAC OS X
    Volume Name: MAC OS X
    Content Hint: Apple_HFS

    Here is another try via the command line:
    dhcp-10-201-238-248:~ KyleWLawrence$ diskutil coreStorage resizeVolume BB2662B7-58F3-401C-B889-F264D79E68B4 210g
    Started CoreStorage operation
    Checking file system
    Performing live verification
    Checking Journaled HFS Plus volume
    Checking extents overflow file
    Checking catalog file
    Incorrect block count for file 2012.12.11.asl
    (It should be 390 instead of 195)
    Checking multi-linked files
    Checking catalog hierarchy
    Checking extended attributes file
    Checking volume bitmap
    Checking volume information
    Invalid volume free block count
    (It should be 21713521 instead of 21713716)
    The volume MAC OS X was found corrupt and needs to be repaired
    Error: -69845: File system verify or repair failed

  • Error message when installing Yosemite OS: this core storage operation is not allowed on a sparse logical volume group

    I was updating my Macbook Air (i7, 4mb RAM, 256 gb) to Yosemite OS when the process was interrupted. After retry, my computer is showing the following message: "this core storage operation is not allowed on a sparse logical volume group". I tried to restart several times, but the problem goes on with error. It would be my computer damaged?

    If you don't already have a current backup of all data, back up before proceeding. There are ways to back up a computer that isn't fully functional. Ask if you need guidance.
    Start up in Recovery mode. When the OS X Utilities screen appears, select Disk Utility.
    In the Disk Utility window, select the icon of the startup volume from the list on the left. It will be nested below another disk icon, usually with the same name. Click the Unlock button in the toolbar. When prompted, enter the login password of a user authorized to unlock the volume, or the alternate decryption key that was generated when you activated FileVault.
    Then, from the menu bar, select
              File ▹ Turn Off Encryption
    Enter the password again.
    You can then restart as usual, if the system is working. Decryption will be completed in the background. It may take several hours, and during that time performance will be reduced.
    If you can't turn off encryption in Disk Utility because the menu item is grayed out, you'll have to erase the volume and then restore the data from a backup. Select the Erase tab, and then select
              Mac OS Extended (Journaled)
    from the Format menu.
    You can then quit to be returned to the main Recovery screen. Follow these instructions if you back up with Time Machine. If you use other backup software, follow its developer's instructions.
    Don't erase the volume unless you have at least two complete, independent backups. One is not enough to be safe.

  • Volume encrypt and erase failed; unable to delete core storage logical volume

    I was attempting to slowly migrate [MI-***] from early 2013 MBPRO to New iMac 5K w/Ceiling Level components.
    Kept going through LONG process and then told me it couldn't create [MBPRO HD Home Username] "Jim" on volume or whatever. NO FileVault enabling/ still skittish from White iMac Encrypting Nightmare days... I don't even know -- I guess it's encrypted on Airport, but not on MBPRO.
    Moved over Applications from outside User account fine; anything inside any User account NOT FINE.
    Hooked up Thunderbolt cable between two macs and restarted MBPRO in T mode... displaying the lightning BOLT on screen that moves around to reduce Burn-in.
    Was able to go onto desktop and use windows to drag n drop 190G of movies over to iMac... wondering how I was going to get all right settings over form FCP...
    Bottom Line: I only have 16G left on MBPRO and need to MOVE video editing to be exclusive on 3T Fusion on Maxed out iMac 5K.
    > Have concluded through whole process that I just want to clone the MBPRO and then delete most of the Larger Videos from MBPRO to recover some of my 760G SSD back.
    So, I grabbed my 2T Airport Extreme and Hooked up the Cat5 LAN port to Cat5 input on back of NEW iMac; Now my MBPRO doesn't have to be locked up for days, because i can use TimeMachine backup to restore or clone the two macs... i hope.
    Went into recovery mode and selected sub-Macintosh HD and attempted to erase; Result time after time after time: "Volume Encrypt and Erase failed." Reason: "Unable to delete the Core Storage logical volume." It dismounts it and I have to restart computer to get it back on. Funny thing is I don't have to use R anymore... which by the way, Command+R appears to be same as just plain old R when restarting... why is that?
    This has become a "since Christmas" runaround session for me and I am sick of it.
    Please help. I would've called Apple Care [and I did last night while driving... just to get advice on direction. I'm usually a pretty savvy PowerUser but this is driving me crazy.] but have to get things done for a meeting tomorrow. Can work on it after hours if someone can advise today on this post.
    Thx,
    Jim

    I have taken some screenshots of the error I get and the state of my HDD in Disk Utility. I did have a weird thing happen after trying to repair using single user mode, where I reopened disk utility and the partitions were NOT greyed out and displayed the correct info concerning space available etc, although after verifying it then reverted back to greyed out with no info.

  • Logical volume is 'not' in filesystem?

    Hi,
    I have installed arch linux on a PogoPlug B01, and have used lvm to configure two HDDs into a software-raid 0 logical volume, as such:
    lvdisplay
    --- Logical volume ---
    LV Path /dev/VolGroup00/lvolpink
    LV Name lvolpink
    VG Name VolGroup00
    LV UUID pchxXD-c2j4-phRy-v5q5-3Bfd-R1Vy-TsAete
    LV Write Access read/write
    LV Creation host, time ,
    LV Status available
    # open 0
    LV Size 3.64 TiB
    Current LE 953862
    Segments 2
    Allocation inherit
    Read ahead sectors auto
    - currently set to 256
    Block device 254:0
    However, the LV Path does not exist, and the lv doesn't show up in /dev/mapper. The only thing within that directory is a 'control' directory. If I add the LV UUID to /etc/fstab and mount -a, I get the usual 'special device does not exist' error. Does anyone know what may be causing this?
    Thanks,
    Chris

    Hi,
    If possible , could you buy without catalogue just to eliminate a business case.
    If for non catalogue purchase , the error still occurs thne you probably have a customizing error.
    If it works, then we have to focus on the catalog flow side.
    Kind regards,
    Yann

  • Failed to revert logical volume group while merging partition

    Hi All,
    Previously, on my macbook pro, I partitioned my disk for win7 for my dual operation system and only left 120 GB for OS, now I want to delete win7 and return disk space to OS. Currently my OS is yosemite.
    I have already deleted disk space for win7 and merged it back to disk0s3. And, I had a problem to merge disk0s2 with disk0s3.
    I was told it is because I need to revet my Logical Volume Group. I am blocked at reverting it.
    This is my disk info:
    rescomp-14-251133:~ rico$ diskutil list; diskutil  cs list
    /dev/disk0
       #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
       0:      GUID_partition_scheme                        *500.1 GB   disk0
       1:                        EFI EFI                     209.7 MB   disk0s1
       2:          Apple_CoreStorage                         119.3 GB   disk0s2
       3:                  Apple_HFS Recovery HD             380.6 GB   disk0s3
    /dev/disk1
       #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
       0:                  Apple_HFS Macintosh HD           *119.0 GB   disk1
                                     Logical Volume on disk0s2
                                     CC457129-6FE9-41A0-B0D2-F547F21A7555
                                     Unencrypted
    CoreStorage logical volume groups (1 found)
    |
    +-- Logical Volume Group F454017F-C531-43BA-B270-E2058E05BFF4
        =========================================================
        Name:         Macintosh HD
        Status:       Online
        Size:         119290187776 B (119.3 GB)
        Free Space:   4096 B (4.1 KB)
        |
        +-< Physical Volume AC7A2748-0DA1-49D6-B50C-30348838760E
        |   ----------------------------------------------------
        |   Index:    0
        |   Disk:     disk0s2
        |   Status:   Online
        |   Size:     119290187776 B (119.3 GB)
        |
        +-> Logical Volume Family 4B7E6277-69BC-475A-BBB7-7A94D6434D9E
            Encryption Status:       Unlocked
            Encryption Type:         AES-XTS
            Conversion Status:       Converting
            Conversion Direction:    -none-
            Has Encrypted Extents:   Yes
            Fully Secure:            No
            Passphrase Required:     No
            |
            +-> Logical Volume CC457129-6FE9-41A0-B0D2-F547F21A7555
                Disk:                  disk1
                Status:                Online
                Size (Total):          118954639360 B (119.0 GB)
                Conversion Progress:   -none-
                Revertible:            Yes (unlock and decryption required)
                LV Name:               Macintosh HD
                Volume Name:           Macintosh HD
                Content Hint:          Apple_HFS
    when I type unlock:
    rescomp-14-251133:~ rico$ diskutil corestorage unlockVolume CC457129-6FE9-41A0-B0D2-F547F21A7555 -stdinpassphrase
    CC457129-6FE9-41A0-B0D2-F547F21A7555 is already unlocked and is attached as disk1
    It is already unlocked
    then, I tried revert it
    rescomp-14-251133:~ rico$ diskutil coreStorage revert CC457129-6FE9-41A0-B0D2-F547F21A7555
    Passphrase:
    Started CoreStorage operation on disk1 Macintosh HD
    Error: -69750: Unable to modify a FileVault context
    Does anyone how I can revert it, then merge disk0s2 and disk0s3

    Here is another try via the command line:
    dhcp-10-201-238-248:~ KyleWLawrence$ diskutil coreStorage resizeVolume BB2662B7-58F3-401C-B889-F264D79E68B4 210g
    Started CoreStorage operation
    Checking file system
    Performing live verification
    Checking Journaled HFS Plus volume
    Checking extents overflow file
    Checking catalog file
    Incorrect block count for file 2012.12.11.asl
    (It should be 390 instead of 195)
    Checking multi-linked files
    Checking catalog hierarchy
    Checking extended attributes file
    Checking volume bitmap
    Checking volume information
    Invalid volume free block count
    (It should be 21713521 instead of 21713716)
    The volume MAC OS X was found corrupt and needs to be repaired
    Error: -69845: File system verify or repair failed

  • Installing OS X Yosemite has changed my Macintosh HD type to Logical Volume Group

    I have just installed OS X 10.10 Yosemite on my late 2013 MacBook Pro with Retina Display,
    The installation has worked perfectly and my computer is now running fine. However after opening disk utility I have noticed where previously my HD would be named "Apple SSD...." and the partition underneath would be named Macintosh HD, both are now the same. Also, previously the HD was GUID type and now they have changed to Logical Volume Group and Logical Partition.
    I installed the software by creating a bootable memory stick with OS X 10.10 and completed a clean install by completely erasing the HD and then installing the new software. After the HD had been erased, Disk Utility still showed the HD as "Apple SSD...." with the partition "Macintosh HD" below and with Type: GUID. It wasn't until after the installation was complete and I had set up the computer and then gone back into Disk Utility when I released it had changed to both labels being "Macintosh HD" and the format type being Logical Volume Group and Logical Partition.
    I have no clue if this is normal and was a planned changed (i.e the software was designed to change it) or if my installation has gone horribly wrong. Can the HD format type be changed back or does Yosemite have to run on Logical Partition and Logical Volume Group formatted HD's.
    Any help would be appreciated as I'm not an expert and I have tried googling for hours and can't find anything helpful/useful or that will work.

    It's a designed change during the Yosemite install process. John Siracusa's excellent review of Yosemite over at Ars Technica provides some commentary on the change, specifically this page: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/10/os-x-10-10/2/

  • Disk Utility formats Hard Drives as Logical Volume Group

    I just replaced a hard drive which had died in my Mac Pro which has OS X 10.9.5. To format the new 3TB hard drive I went to Disk Utility. I used "Erase" in its fastest form and the drive was formatted with the Type: Logical Volume Group.
    I remember this was a problem a few years ago when I first put hard drives in this computer. I think it was considered a bug in the Disk Utility in OS X 10.8 that it would automatically format drives greater than 2 TB as Logical Volume Group. The solution for me was to restart the computer with my OS X 10.6 disk and use the Disk Utility in that to reformat the drive. I never really understood why Logical Volume Group was a problem but I just obeyed what the wise ones of the Internet had to say.
    So, now I am wondering if I should reformat my new Hard Drive as GUID using my OS X 10.6 optical disk again? If it was a bug in the Disk Utility of OS X 10.8 then why is it not fixed in the Disk Utility of OS X 10.9? Is there an actual problem with having disks format formatted as Logical Volume Group? Is this now just Apple's way of doing things?
    Thank you.

    keg55 wrote:
    You could do your reformat using your 10.6 DVD. That's a decision that's up to you.
    Not every bug in a previous OS gets fixed in a new OS.
    I don't believe CoreStorage (Logical Volume Group) causes any sort of issues. Whenever one encrypts their Macintosh HD, the format is converted to CoreStorage. Fusion Drives are using CoreStorage and now Yosemite converts portables (laptops) to CoreStorage during the install process. As far as Yosemite is concerned, Apple seems to have gone the route of CoreStorage for portables. Even during the Setup on a portable, FileVault is offered with the default of YES being checked. So, if a customer isn't paying attention and continues with the install, they could encrypt their drive without knowing to uncheck the default checkbox.
    Thank you for your reply.
    I have decided to reformat my new hard drive using my 10.6 disk. I like being able to split it up into more than one volume if need be.
    I understand that not every bug in a previous OS gets fixed, but this strikes me as being really a very large bug, so I think it would be good if Apple addressed it.
    It is useful to know about Yosemite's behaviour. When I upgrade to Yosemite I will be a bit more prepared. In fact my MacBook Pro has FileVault on with Mavericks so Yosemite won't change anything there.

Maybe you are looking for

  • Profit Centre Derivation - User Exit

    We have set up a substitution that is based on the sold-to party - i.e. we use data on the sold-to party to derive the profit centre (the profit centre is based on the country of the customer).  However, ideally we would like to base it on the countr

  • Filtering by file size

    Hi, I was *so* hoping that we'd finally be able to filter (or create a Smart Collection) based upon file size. There are many reasons why this would be useful but the thing that trips me up every once in a while is that I'll forget to flatten my laye

  • Can't Uninstall CC App

    Hi, all. I noticed tonight that the Creative Cloud icon was missing on my MacBook Pro (I have Creative Cloud installed on my desktop as well). I checked System Preferences, and saw there was nothing there related to CC. I then went into the Applicati

  • MS IE toStaticHTML String Parsing Cross-Site Scripting Vulnerability alarms

    Hi, I was wondering if someone else has noted an increase in false positives concerning the following 2 events: - Microsoft Internet Explorer toStaticHTML String Parsing Cross-Site Scripting  Vulnerability - Microsoft Office Excel Ghost Record Parsin

  • Error message when populating drop-down list with mysql DB

    Hi everyone, i'm having an error message which gives zero result on google... here's the context: i have a drop-down list called "Patient" in the template pages of a livecycle form. The binding is set to Global so that the value is the same on the tw