Re: FYIO: A rant about btrfs

[Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>]

Zygo Blaxell posted on Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:08:56 -0400 as excerpted:

> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 03:04:38PM -0400, Vincent Olivier wrote:
>> 
>> OK fine. Let it be clearer then (on the Btrfs wiki): nobarrier is an
>> absolute no go. Case closed.
> 
> Sometimes it is useful to make an ephemeral filesystem, i.e. a btrfs on
> a dm-crypt device with a random key that is not stored.  This
> configuration intentionally and completely destroys the entire
> filesystem, and all data on it, in the event of a power failure.  It's
> useful for things like temporary table storage, where ramfs is too
> small, swap-backed tmpfs is too slow, and/or there is a requirement that
> the data not be persisted across reboots.
> 
> In other words, nobarrier is for a little better performance when you
> already want to _intentionally_ destroy your filesystem on power
> failure.

Very good explanation of why it's useful to have such an otherwise 
destructive mount option even available in the first place.  Thanks! =:^)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman