1 |
On Sunday, December 20, 2015 02:15:33 AM covici@××××××××××.com wrote: |
2 |
> covici@××××××××××.com wrote: |
3 |
> > Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 2:56 AM, <covici@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
5 |
> > > > I was never able to get either zfs or btrfs to work correctly, zfs was |
6 |
> > > > very vulnerable -- I forgot to export a zfs on a usb drive and got an |
7 |
> > > > enless loop of processes untill I rebooted. Btrfs never did work for |
8 |
> > > > me, I created a pool, copied my root file system, usr and var into |
9 |
> > > > ssubvolumes, and copied my files, but when I would boot into it, |
10 |
> > > > everything was messed up, processes thought files were missing, very |
11 |
> > > > strange. So, how did you set up either one of those -- I would love |
12 |
> > > > to |
13 |
> > > > use it because I have ssds and I don't want to rely on their firmware |
14 |
> > > > either. |
15 |
> > > |
16 |
> > > Well, I don't have much personal experience with zfs, but the ZFS on |
17 |
> > > Linux lead is a Gentoo dev, so you're in good company there all the |
18 |
> > > same. I personally use btrfs. |
19 |
> > > |
20 |
> > > The obvious caveat is that it is still relatively experimental, and |
21 |
> > > raid5/6 is VERY experimental. I plan to convert to raid5/6 at a |
22 |
> > > future date but am staying away from it for now (and a selling point |
23 |
> > > of btrfs is that reshaping in-place is easy). |
24 |
> > > |
25 |
> > > I can't really vouch for what went wrong with your migration. It |
26 |
> > > could be anything from a failure to preserve all your file attributes |
27 |
> > > to something with btrfs itself or your bootloader config/etc. It |
28 |
> > > isn't hard to do a new install in btrfs though, and you can always |
29 |
> > > mess with it in a VM, or even mess with doing migrations in a VM. |
30 |
> > > |
31 |
> > > My btrfs install notes are at: |
32 |
> > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VJlJyYLTZScta9a81xgKOIBjYsG3_VfxxmUS |
33 |
> > > xG23Uxg/edit?usp=sharing (I still plan to merge this stuff into the |
34 |
> > > handbook. Maybe a good holiday project... Oh, and if it isn't already |
35 |
> > > obvious anybody can add comments and half this list seems to have |
36 |
> > > already done so.) |
37 |
> > > |
38 |
> > > Oh, for a boot image I tend to use system rescue CD since it has all |
39 |
> > > the necessary userspace and is gentoo-based (and you can always emerge |
40 |
> > > --sync and install whatever you need inside it). I tend to use the |
41 |
> > > alternate kernel since it is newer, and with btrfs newer tends to be |
42 |
> > > better. In production I'm currently on 3.18 eyeing an upgrade to 4.1. |
43 |
> > > I tend to stay on the latest longterm, but not when they are first |
44 |
> > > declared as longterm. That seems to be the sweet spot for getting |
45 |
> > > btrfs features and bugfixes, but not getting as many of the |
46 |
> > > regressions. I use grub2/dracut to boot, and that is in my guide. |
47 |
> > > |
48 |
> > > If you follow those notes for a stage3 install it should "just work." |
49 |
> > > If you want to mess around I suggest just doing a vanilla install on a |
50 |
> > > VM once to validate that it works for you and then tweak from a |
51 |
> > > position of strength. |
52 |
> > |
53 |
> > Thanks. I will check out your notes and figure out something -- it was |
54 |
> > definitely strange. I have a vm I can play with -- its older, but I can |
55 |
> > bring it up to date and see what happens. |
56 |
> > |
57 |
> > Thanks again. |
58 |
> |
59 |
> One thing I was thinking of -- since I like separate file systems for |
60 |
> each major directory i.e. separate /usr, /var, /home, /tmp and even |
61 |
> /var/tmp/portage, I thought I would make btrfs file systems using lvm. |
62 |
> The advantage is that I use lvm already, so this would be easy for me to |
63 |
> do and safer in case one of them goes south and easier to control space |
64 |
> allocation. The only disadvantage I can see is if its a performance |
65 |
> hit, does anyone have any knowledge of that is true? |
66 |
|
67 |
I only played around with ZFS so far, but I believe the same holds true for |
68 |
BTRFS. |
69 |
|
70 |
These new filesystems should really be handed control of the entire disk as |
71 |
they already include LVM-like functionality. |
72 |
You can create subvolumes and limit those to different sizes if you so desire. |
73 |
|
74 |
When using an additional layer between ZFS/BTRFS and the discs, you will loose |
75 |
performance with no gain in flexibility. |
76 |
|
77 |
-- |
78 |
Joost |