Re: [linux-lvm] Does LVM have any plan/schedule to support btrfs in fsadm

2021-06-27 Thread heming.z...@suse.com

On 6/25/21 6:57 PM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:

Dne 25. 06. 21 v 7:28 heming.z...@suse.com napsal(a):

Hello Zdenek & David,

From URL: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Btrfs
The btrfs becomes default filesystem for desktops.

Do we have any plan to add btrfs code for scripts/fsadm.sh?

If the answer is yes. I could share a suse special patch, this patch
had been run about 4 years in suse products.



Hi

If you have some patches provided with some good usable testing (lvm2 test 
suite)  - it could be possibly merged.


Patch for fsadm is already many years ago, but test suite is empty.
I plan to add some test cases then file the patch files.



On the other hand helping/suggesting users to use Btrfs on top of lvm2 has also 
its logical 'question' marks.  Since  btrfs users should probably be avoiding 
placing 'another' layer between real hw - when btrfs should be mostly capable 
handling lvm2 features in its 'very own' way. Each layer has it's own 
measurable costs. And yeah we do not want to be involved into btrfs related 
recovery cases, as we simply never understood its handling of attached disks.



In my opinion, the using style of btrfs by many users are same as ext4/xfs.
btrfs has lots of features, but there are MAY experimental or not stable.
Users prefer to use btrfs core functionality. And not to speak of compatible
reasons, in many scenarios, btrfs still works with lvm or mdadm.

For minimal code design (minimal bug occur), in fsadm, we only treat btrfs as
another ext4/xfs style filesystem.
"fsadm resize" executes "btrfs resize"
"fsadm check" executes "btrfs scrub"

Thanks,
Heming


___
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/

Re: [linux-lvm] Does LVM have any plan/schedule to support btrfs in fsadm

2021-06-27 Thread Stuart D Gathman

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021, heming.z...@suse.com wrote:


In my opinion, the using style of btrfs by many users are same as ext4/xfs.


Yes.  I like the checksums in metadata feature for enhanced integrity
checking.

It seems too complicated to have anytime soon - but when a filesystem
detects corruption, and is on an LVM (or md) RAID1 layer, an ioctl to
read alternate mirror branches to see which (if any) has the correct
data would allow recovery.  Btrfs does this if it is doing the
mirroring, but then you lose all the other features from LVM or md raid10, 
including running other filesystems and efficient virtual disks for

virtual machines.

We eventually got DISCARD operations to pass to lower layers.
Dealing with mirror branches should really be a thing too.

___
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/