On 03/16/2016 09:04 AM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Anton Aylward <opensuse@antonaylward.com> wrote:
That's the whole point: with BtrFS there is *no* partitioning, its all one file system. There are no boundaries.
There are, on subvolume granularity.
Could you explain that and illustrate it please. Linda gave a wonderful and detailed example of using XFS, setting the 'granularity' there to make the most use of the partition and suited to a particular and specific type of file/application. Perhaps you could do the same with a subvolume, and them again with a another subvolume in a quite different manner.
Some people seem to consider this a good thing. While I can see why, I personally don't. I think that being unconstrained leads to poor operational discipline.
"No partitions" does not automatically imply "unconstrained".
The assertion made elsewhere that this is all one file system so that a subvolume is allocated space from the general 'pool' as files are created there is something that I take to be 'unconstrained'. If there is a way to limit the number of files in a subvolume (aka the number of inodes or inode/data ratio), or the amount of space those files can take up before a limit is forcible imposed, I would like an explanation of 'how'. Or perhaps we have a different idea of what 'constrained' means? My point here is that even without using quotas (which is something few people seem to have a handle on) the other "popular" file systems, such as ReiserFS, Ext4 and XFS, all have the ability to manage allocation, limits and more in ways that can be very specifically and very suited to types of files and to applications. All have the ability to 'grow', some can 'shrink' as well, given that the disk partition is there. LVM makes the ability to add new blocks to a partition easy, even if that means adding another disk/spindle. All this is done using conventional and established tools. And those file system report well with 'df' :-) Yes, specific users might not be familiar with some of those. Before Linda prompted me, I knew nothing of XFS. having a LVM system made it easy to experiment with XFS and see how it managed my videos compared to the ReiserFS I'd been using before. I'm now a 'convert"; thank you, Linda. I was willing to learn. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org