Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #171159 > unrolled thread

Decrease/increase XFS partitions

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Decrease/increase XFS partitions ML mail <mlnospam@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-17 09:50 +0200
    Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Igor Cicimov <icicimov@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 10:00 +0200
      Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-08-17 10:10 +0200
        Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-08-17 15:40 +0200
          Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2016-08-17 21:10 +0200
      Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-08-17 15:00 +0200
    Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-08-17 15:00 +0200
      Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-08-17 15:20 +0200
        Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-08-17 15:30 +0200
          Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-08-17 15:40 +0200
            Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-08-17 16:20 +0200
        Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-08-17 16:00 +0200
          Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-08-17 16:10 +0200
            Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-08-17 16:30 +0200
            Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 21:20 +0200
      Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-17 15:40 +0200
        Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-08-17 16:00 +0200
          Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-08-17 16:10 +0200
            Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-08-17 16:30 +0200
              Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-08-17 17:00 +0200
            Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-08-17 17:00 +0200
          Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-17 16:30 +0200
        Re: Decrease/increase XFS partitions deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 21:10 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#171159 — Decrease/increase XFS partitions

Hello

On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:

- /dev/sdb1 of 4TB
- /dev/sdb2 of 9TB

Now I would like to decrease the first partition of 1TB in order to increase the second partition by that very same 1TB. Any ideas how to do that? My partition table is using GPT and I have parted installed. 

Regards
ML

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#171160

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 17 Aug 2016 5:43 pm, "ML mail" <mlnospam@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
>

Afaik you cant shrink xfs file systems.

> - /dev/sdb1 of 4TB
> - /dev/sdb2 of 9TB
>
> Now I would like to decrease the first partition of 1TB in order to
increase the second partition by that very same 1TB. Any ideas how to do
that? My partition table is using GPT and I have parted installed.
>
> Regards
> ML
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171161

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 05:49:39PM +1000, Igor Cicimov wrote:
> On 17 Aug 2016 5:43 pm, "ML mail" <mlnospam@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
> >
> 
> Afaik you cant shrink xfs file systems.

Right. See [1]. There seems to be some ongoing work towards that goal [2].

[1] http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Is_there_a_way_to_make_a_XFS_filesystem_larger_or_smaller.3F
[2] http://www.xfs.org/index.php/Shrinking_Support

- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAle0Gq8ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kai9QCcCzEKzR9sj1l2AXtofc02mkat
vKwAn17GVoU8LQjWvHkXJybDARPpWm4z
=QHs5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171175

On Wednesday 17 August 2016 04:05:03 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 05:49:39PM +1000, Igor Cicimov wrote:
> > On 17 Aug 2016 5:43 pm, "ML mail" <mlnospam@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
> >
> > Afaik you cant shrink xfs file systems.
>
> Right. See [1]. There seems to be some ongoing work towards that goal
> [2].
>
> [1]
> http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Is_there_a_way_to_make_a_XFS_files
>ystem_larger_or_smaller.3F [2]
> http://www.xfs.org/index.php/Shrinking_Support
>
This last link is from 2008.  It does seem to be difficult, and only 
accomplishable by a full dump, repartition and recovery. The latter 
would not be a problem if a regular backup is being done. But I've no 
knowldge about how tar handles an xfs filesystem. Ack the man page, its 
agnostic as there is zero mention of the filesytem in use.

I use amanda as the tar manager here but my nightly backups are rather 
tiny compared to 13Tb, rarely exceeding 20 gigabytes for 4 machines. 

With my wrapper script, I can lose the main drive, and put in a new one, 
and have it recovered to its state as of about 3am this morning in 4 or 
5 hours. Any transactions after that time would be lost but 98% of that 
is email traffic.  Non-commercial IOW. Using commodity 1T drives, I have 
the last 30 days worth of amanda backups on one of them using virtual 
tapes. Unlike a tape drive that always has to spend the winter holidays 
in Oklahoma City getting rebuilt, I have random (fast) access to my 
data. That drive is now about 4 years old, has had 25 re-allocated 
sectors for much of that time, less than 50 power ups, and shows 45% 
usage in a df -h report right now.  Whats not to like? :)

What does zfs do for one that ext4 can't that makes it attractive to use?

> -- t


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171199

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:38:50AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> This last link is from 2008.  It does seem to be difficult, and only 
> accomplishable by a full dump, repartition and recovery. The latter 
> would not be a problem if a regular backup is being done. But I've no 
> knowldge about how tar handles an xfs filesystem. Ack the man page, its 
> agnostic as there is zero mention of the filesytem in use.
> 
> I use amanda as the tar manager here but my nightly backups are rather 
> tiny compared to 13Tb, rarely exceeding 20 gigabytes for 4 machines. 
> 
> With my wrapper script, I can lose the main drive, and put in a new one, 
> and have it recovered to its state as of about 3am this morning in 4 or 
> 5 hours. Any transactions after that time would be lost but 98% of that 
> is email traffic.  Non-commercial IOW. Using commodity 1T drives, I have 
> the last 30 days worth of amanda backups on one of them using virtual 
> tapes. Unlike a tape drive that always has to spend the winter holidays 
> in Oklahoma City getting rebuilt, I have random (fast) access to my 
> data. That drive is now about 4 years old, has had 25 re-allocated 
> sectors for much of that time, less than 50 power ups, and shows 45% 
> usage in a df -h report right now.  Whats not to like? :)
> 
> What does zfs do for one that ext4 can't that makes it attractive to use?

ZFS has:
 - checksum of all data, so you can detect when you are reading
   data that wasn't what you wrote

 - if RAID is set up, correction of that data, including knowing
   which cop(ies) pass the checksum

 - built in snapshotting, faster and more efficient than LVM's
   version

 - built in send/receive - like dump, but with better than rsync
   efficiency

 - read and write caching for spinning disks can be done with
   SSDs, to provide a significant price/performance advantage
   for large storage.

Of these, I guess the last one wouldn't be too interesting to
you. 

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171168

On Wednesday 17 August 2016 03:49:39 Igor Cicimov wrote:

> On 17 Aug 2016 5:43 pm, "ML mail" <mlnospam@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
>
> Afaik you cant shrink xfs file systems.
>
Is there a specific reason for that?

> > - /dev/sdb1 of 4TB
> > - /dev/sdb2 of 9TB
> >
> > Now I would like to decrease the first partition of 1TB in order to
>
> increase the second partition by that very same 1TB. Any ideas how to
> do that? My partition table is using GPT and I have parted installed.
>
> > Regards
> > ML


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171169

On Wednesday 17 August 2016 03:43:36 ML mail wrote:

> Hello
>
> On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
>
> - /dev/sdb1 of 4TB
> - /dev/sdb2 of 9TB
>
> Now I would like to decrease the first partition of 1TB in order to
> increase the second partition by that very same 1TB. Any ideas how to
> do that? My partition table is using GPT and I have parted installed.
>
> Regards
> ML

I think this is a job for gparted. But since the amount of data that 
needs to be moved is large, I'd make sure the weather is good so the 
power won't be interrupted OR you had a UPS capable of running it until 
standby power can get fired up and the load picked back up.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171171

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 08:54:47AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 August 2016 03:43:36 ML mail wrote:
> 
> > Hello
> >
> > On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
> >
> > - /dev/sdb1 of 4TB
> > - /dev/sdb2 of 9TB
> >
> > Now I would like to decrease the first partition [...]

> I think this is a job for gparted [...]

Gparted will grow (or shrink) the partition. Not the file system.
The file system has to play along, otherwise you'll get a train
wreck.

 - Shrinking:
   - first, shrink the file system (make sure FS has no data
     beyond some block [1]
   - then, shrink the partition accordingly

 - Growing
   - first, grow the partition
   - then, grow the filesystem accordingly (i.e. tell the file
     system it can use the extra space [2]

[1] Ext2/3/4 supports shrinking. XFS not, according to the FAQ
[2] XFS (and Ext*) support growing

regards

- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAle0Y5EACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZojQCdH/KcqZ6M+5UdhxqtmSAFhT2i
lnEAn0XLNyV3mlpF4KF2TzKWLwKz/0Ra
=Zemq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171172

Le 17/08/2016 à 15:16, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
>
> Gparted will grow (or shrink) the partition. Not the file system.

AFAIK, Gparted does resize the filesystem too.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171173

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 03:28:57PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> Le 17/08/2016 à 15:16, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
> >
> >Gparted will grow (or shrink) the partition. Not the file system.
> 
> AFAIK, Gparted does resize the filesystem too.

On its own? Or does it call out to the appropriate filesystem
utilities? Does it grok XFS better than XFS does?

regards
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAle0Z0gACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbA4wCfQVh+ND4GTmOTdH5YF4SWwOfW
q18AnjtO7ELXiEulObueGLcAp0xt3ycA
=Qg9p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171180

Le 17/08/2016 à 15:31, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 03:28:57PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
>> Le 17/08/2016 à 15:16, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
>>>
>>> Gparted will grow (or shrink) the partition. Not the file system.
>>
>> AFAIK, Gparted does resize the filesystem too.
>
> On its own? Or does it call out to the appropriate filesystem
> utilities? Does it grok XFS better than XFS does?

According to <gparted.sourceforge.net/features.php>, it needs filesystem 
utilities for most filesystems.

> Perhaps gparted knows how to do the dump/restore
> thing, given enough spare disk space. That would be definitely
> a (slow, but feasible) solution!

Indeed the page states that it can shrink XFS using the "copy" 
functionnality, performed with xfsdump and xfsrestore.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171176

On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:16:01 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 08:54:47AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 August 2016 03:43:36 ML mail wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
> > >
> > > - /dev/sdb1 of 4TB
> > > - /dev/sdb2 of 9TB
> > >
> > > Now I would like to decrease the first partition [...]
> >
> > I think this is a job for gparted [...]
>
> Gparted will grow (or shrink) the partition. Not the file system.
> The file system has to play along, otherwise you'll get a train
> wreck.
>
>  - Shrinking:
>    - first, shrink the file system (make sure FS has no data
>      beyond some block [1]
>    - then, shrink the partition accordingly
>
>  - Growing
>    - first, grow the partition
>    - then, grow the filesystem accordingly (i.e. tell the file
>      system it can use the extra space [2]
>
> [1] Ext2/3/4 supports shrinking. XFS not, according to the FAQ
> [2] XFS (and Ext*) support growing
>
> regards
>
> -- t
And I sit here with egg on my face. :(

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171178

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:55:12AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:16:01 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

[...]

> >  - Shrinking:
[...]
> >  - Growing
[...]

> And I sit here with egg on my face. :(

Not necessarily. Perhaps gparted knows how to do the dump/restore
thing, given enough spare disk space. That would be definitely
a (slow, but feasible) solution!

I was just recommending to look closely before putting one's
work and sweat at risk :-)

regards
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAle0bdwACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZ1BgCfVOOwIIWDyWXADfsjmA48B4PO
Oq0AniTAr42FTrF6y5coiYil5GlZhqTe
=FqMg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171182

On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:59:56 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:55:12AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:16:01 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > >  - Shrinking:
>
> [...]
>
> > >  - Growing
>
> [...]
>
> > And I sit here with egg on my face. :(
>
> Not necessarily. Perhaps gparted knows how to do the dump/restore
> thing, given enough spare disk space. That would be definitely
> a (slow, but feasible) solution!
>
> I was just recommending to look closely before putting one's
> work and sweat at risk :-)
>
> regards
> -- t

Even so, Tomas, I think I would try it on a throwaway filesystem first. 
And absolutely not on a live system. But the OP was talking in terms of 
terabytes, which can be a whole new game.  Thats dirt few if any have 
walked on.  I sure have not.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171201

tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:55:12AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:16:01 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>> >  - Shrinking:
> [...]
>> >  - Growing
> [...]
> 
>> And I sit here with egg on my face. :(
> 
> Not necessarily. Perhaps gparted knows how to do the dump/restore
> thing, given enough spare disk space. That would be definitely
> a (slow, but feasible) solution!
> 
> I was just recommending to look closely before putting one's
> work and sweat at risk :-)
> 
> regards

If someone does this with success please post a short how to somewhere, as I
gave up because there was no reliable information what is necessary to
actually do it without loosing data - ending up in backup anyway - gparted
was extra work.

It would really help if someone point to a good howto

thanks

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171174

On Wed 17 Aug 2016 at 08:54:47 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> On Wednesday 17 August 2016 03:43:36 ML mail wrote:
> 
> > Hello
> >
> > On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
> >
> > - /dev/sdb1 of 4TB
> > - /dev/sdb2 of 9TB
> >
> > Now I would like to decrease the first partition of 1TB in order to
> > increase the second partition by that very same 1TB. Any ideas how to
> > do that? My partition table is using GPT and I have parted installed.
> >
> > Regards
> > ML
> 
> I think this is a job for gparted. But since the amount of data that 

You would advise using gparted to shrink an XFS partition in spite of

  http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Is_there_a_way_to_make_a_XFS_filesystem_larger_or_smaller.3F

saying it is not possible?

Is this advice based on experience?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171177

On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:12:40 Brian wrote:

> On Wed 17 Aug 2016 at 08:54:47 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 August 2016 03:43:36 ML mail wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > On my Debian 8 machine I have two XFS data partitions on my disk:
> > >
> > > - /dev/sdb1 of 4TB
> > > - /dev/sdb2 of 9TB
> > >
> > > Now I would like to decrease the first partition of 1TB in order
> > > to increase the second partition by that very same 1TB. Any ideas
> > > how to do that? My partition table is using GPT and I have parted
> > > installed.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > ML
> >
> > I think this is a job for gparted. But since the amount of data that
>
> You would advise using gparted to shrink an XFS partition in spite of
>
>  
> http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Is_there_a_way_to_make_a_XFS_files
>ystem_larger_or_smaller.3F
>
> saying it is not possible?
>
> Is this advice based on experience?

No, I just assumed, incorrectly it seems, that zfs had a command 
structure similar to ext2-3-4. The above link says you can't without a 
full backup, repartition and restore.

So I stand corrected.  And better educated.

And yes, I have used gparted to adjust ext3-4 systems.  Its a rather 
arduous, time consuming task but it worked.  And its dangerous to do on 
a live filesystem so I boot gparted from optical media.

But the size of my data has not grown as fast as the size of a commodity 
drive, a 1T drive is now $50 in my mailbox, so space is not, and has not 
been a problem for me for 4 or 5 years. 

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171179

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:53:36AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:12:40 Brian wrote:
> > You would advise using gparted to shrink an XFS partition in spite of
> >  
> > http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Is_there_a_way_to_make_a_XFS_files
> >ystem_larger_or_smaller.3F
> >
> > saying it is not possible?
> 
> No, I just assumed, incorrectly it seems, that zfs had a command 
> structure similar to ext2-3-4.

XFS and ZFS are completely different things.

XFS is a file system originating with SGI in 1993.  It's been in use
on Linux for years.  Largely considered stable.

ZFS is a file system originating with Sun in 2005.  I don't know anyone
who uses it.  Largely considered experimental/unfinished outside of
Solaris.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171183

On Wednesday 17 August 2016 10:00:50 Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:53:36AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:12:40 Brian wrote:
> > > You would advise using gparted to shrink an XFS partition in spite
> > > of
> > >
> > > http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Is_there_a_way_to_make_a_XFS_f
> > >iles ystem_larger_or_smaller.3F
> > >
> > > saying it is not possible?
> >
> > No, I just assumed, incorrectly it seems, that zfs had a command
> > structure similar to ext2-3-4.
>
> XFS and ZFS are completely different things.

We have too many filesystem with similar names, can I plead that was a 
typu?
>
> XFS is a file system originating with SGI in 1993.  It's been in use
> on Linux for years.  Largely considered stable.
>
> ZFS is a file system originating with Sun in 2005.  I don't know
> anyone who uses it.  Largely considered experimental/unfinished
> outside of Solaris.


ISTR its (ZFS) a compressed filesytem?  Scary.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#171188

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:27:07AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>On Wednesday 17 August 2016 10:00:50 Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:53:36AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 17 August 2016 09:12:40 Brian wrote:
>> > > You would advise using gparted to shrink an XFS partition in spite
>> > > of
>> > >
>> > > http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Is_there_a_way_to_make_a_XFS_f
>> > >iles ystem_larger_or_smaller.3F
>> > >
>> > > saying it is not possible?
>> >
>> > No, I just assumed, incorrectly it seems, that zfs had a command
>> > structure similar to ext2-3-4.
>>
>> XFS and ZFS are completely different things.
>
>We have too many filesystem with similar names, can I plead that was a
>typu?
>>
>> XFS is a file system originating with SGI in 1993.  It's been in use
>> on Linux for years.  Largely considered stable.
>>
>> ZFS is a file system originating with Sun in 2005.  I don't know
>> anyone who uses it.  Largely considered experimental/unfinished
>> outside of Solaris.
>
>
>ISTR its (ZFS) a compressed filesytem?  Scary.

Z stood for Zettabyte (10**21), not zip. It does *support* compression 
(like NTFS does), but it is not a compressed filesystem (like cramfs is) 
per se.

Also, ZFS is about as stable as btrfs. It's suitable for everyday use, 
but not necessarily for mainstream use. It's seeing reasonably 
widespread use in NAS or SAN contexts.


-- 
For more information, please reread.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web