From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C650B1381FA for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 12:57:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1971BE0BE2; Fri, 16 May 2014 12:54:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail0200.smtp25.com (mail0200.smtp25.com [174.37.170.200]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10662E0BDE for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 12:54:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ccs.covici.com (d-out-001.smtp25.com [67.228.158.174]) by s-out-001.smtp25.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s4GCsrM4027592 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 08:54:54 -0400 Received: from ccs.covici.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ccs.covici.com (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s4GCsr5T030700 for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 08:54:53 -0400 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] boot problems In-reply-to: <537605FC.1000202@xunil.at> References: <5364C0F9.3000906@xunil.at> <2219291.LPmZhmqkJ1@andromeda> <536545AB.2060008@xunil.at> <53672D31.1030108@xunil.at> <53746809.9080604@xunil.at> <5374855C.4040203@xunil.at> <537506FE.3090701@xunil.at> <5375DE75.7070501@xunil.at> <5375F141.5080704@gmail.com> <16553.1400238867@ccs.covici.com> <20140516130319.2a03b778@hactar.digimed.co.uk> <537605FC.1000202! @xunil.at> Comments: In-reply-to "Stefan G. Weichinger" message dated "Fri, 16 May 2014 14:35:08 +0200." X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3; GNU Emacs 23.4.1 Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 08:54:53 -0400 Message-ID: <30699.1400244893@ccs.covici.com> From: covici@ccs.covici.com X-SpamH-OriginatingIP: 70.109.53.110 X-SpamH-Filter: s-out-001.smtp25.com-s4GCsrM4027592 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Archives-Salt: 5f314f76-3cea-4e6a-8b9f-418092021938 X-Archives-Hash: 63c5943200dd414fa3d9e6751a7cb09e Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 16.05.2014 14:03, schrieb Neil Bothwick: > > On Fri, 16 May 2014 07:14:27 -0400, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote: > > > >> So far, I have liked lvm, what's the advantage of btrfs over > >> lvm? > > > > I have only looked at btrfs, with a consideration for switching > > from ZFS, but it seems to offer the same advantages as ZFS. That > > is, it makes things even easier than LVM does. with LVM you can > > easily resize volumes and the filesystems on them, but it is still > > two or three steps, more if you add RAID into the equation. The > > modern filesystems do it all at once. If you need a bigger var, you > > just tell it so. And it is exactly the same process for shrinking a > > volume, something that can be tricky with LVM because of the need > > to handle volume and filesystem separately. > > btrfs and zfs are removing the various layers we all had to deal with: > > partitions, logical volumes, raid-arrays, filesystems, and then > snapshots etc. > > With these modern filesystems you are able to basically say: > > "I have these physical devices/disks, create me a pool of storage with > these properties" and then just use that pool in a flexible and > dynamic way. > > Your disk based storage is then usable in a way RAM is, you add it and > it is available and you can then use it where you like it. > > No (or let's say "much less" ...) fixed and hard barriers like > partition sizes, if you need space for /var, use it ... if you want to > set quotas on /home, just set them for the subvolume, if you add > another pair of harddisks, tell btrfs to redistribute redundancy > information ("re-balance"). > > (I see that Alan right now answered basically the same ;-) ). > > You get checksums for your blocks and the possibility to repair rotted > blocks ... you get snapshots within the filesystem, no more slow > rsnapshot-crontabs ... > > I used zfs-fuse back then and learned about the concepts, and it blew > my mind already years ago ;-) > > zfs on linux ... it works fine for me on one server, but I never > really wanted it on my main machines (desktop and laptops) although I > once even wrote some "how to use zfs on your fully encrypted laptop" > for a magazine. It always feels like "suboptimal because it is not in > the kernel" to me (think licensing issues here). > > btrfs is officially in the kernel, still marked "experimental" because > it is in active development, after all I read over the last days it > should be quite stable to use if you don't run very complex setups or > so ... and doing regular backups should be usual for the people in > this list, I assume? Distros like SLES come with btrfs as default fs > (soon). > > I migrated ~3 machines to btrfs in the last days and I really love > getting rid of all the partitions and raids that grew over the years > ... for now it is cleaned up and flexible and so far solid. > > btrfs and zfs have different concepts for various aspects, but > basically the same goals. I definitely recommend to get in touch with > this generation of filesystems. Thanks much for that explanation. So where do I find some documentation for btrfs and its user space tools? -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici covici@ccs.covici.com