On 2016-03-15 18:37, jdd wrote:
Le 15/03/2016 18:04, Anton Aylward a écrit :
yes, and it's why I wonder is btrfs subvolumes are better or not. Subvolumes do not need at all fixed partitions, lvm allows easy changing.
as someone said, when fixing problem each level of difficulty is an obstacle. With lvm it's much more difficult to know how the disk is used (let only because the computer owner do not know this himself), devices names are pretty hard to remember, partitioning needs the correct driver version to be read (and chance is you don't have it), etc. If lwm go through several disks, I simply refuse to try.
That's the point. With LVM you need to learn how to resize the spaces, and spend time doing it. Yes, you do not have fixed partitions, you can add space when you need it. Not always subtract space. But the admin has to do it. Posibly tell LVM to give more space to such "space", then use something to grow the filesystem itself if it is not automatic. With btrfs subvolumes you do nothing. There are no constraints on the size of any of them, as long as there is free space on the big partition. Of course it has caveats. If there is corruption, all of them are affected, for instance. LVM also has caveats: it can break, and if it does you need to understand how to boot and rescue LVM. I don't, I don't want to spend time learning it (not interested), so I made the choice long ago to not use it :-) (nor do I use btrfs) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)