| 1 |
Am 20.12.2015 um 08:40 schrieb J. Roeleveld: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> These new filesystems should really be handed control of the entire disk as |
| 4 |
> they already include LVM-like functionality. |
| 5 |
> You can create subvolumes and limit those to different sizes if you so desire. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> When using an additional layer between ZFS/BTRFS and the discs, you will loose |
| 8 |
> performance with no gain in flexibility. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
And you lose the feature of protecting your blocks against bitrot! |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
btrfs comes with subvolumes and there is no need to use it on top of |
| 13 |
LVM. If you want separated /, /usr, /var etc cut yourself subvolumes out |
| 14 |
of your btrfs-filesystem, as mentioned. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
forget LVM with btrfs, it's inside already in a way ;-) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I use btrfs on at least 3 systems for years now. No problems. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
OK, it gives a bit of a learning curve. One big pool of storage |
| 21 |
(depending on how many disks you throw into it), all the subvolumes |
| 22 |
share the same free blocks ... this may feel scary and strange at first. |
Archives