From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:34:32 +0100 From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" Subject: Re: How about ext3? (was RE: [linux-lvm] XFS and LVM) Message-ID: <20010523103432.D27177@redhat.com> References: <20010523083432.3601F15CB5@mail.linux-new-media.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from steve.wray@the.net.nz on Wed, May 23, 2001 at 08:35:36PM +1200 Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-lvm@sistina.com Cc: Stephen Tweedie , Steve Wray Hi, On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 08:35:36PM +1200, Steve Wray wrote: > Any experience with ext3? > Is it shrinkable? It is format-compatible with ext2, so offline e2resize should work happily on ext3 for both shrinking and growing. Online, only growing has been implemented (but not all of the kernel support is integrated). I haven't tried doing a resize on ext3 so we might have to teach the e2resize tools not to worry if they see the HAS_JOURNAL flag set in the superblock, but there is nothing in the format itself to prevent it from working. Cheers, Stephen