From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.trendhosting.net ([195.8.117.5]:56130 "EHLO mail1.trendhosting.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751873Ab2HLQw4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Aug 2012 12:52:56 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail1.trendhosting.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6753D150C1 for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 18:37:05 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail1.trendhosting.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (thp003.trendhosting.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id yK1gK3Ihqcio for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 18:36:52 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <5027DDFC.60504@pocock.com.au> Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 16:46:52 +0000 From: Daniel Pocock MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: raw partition or LV for btrfs? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: I notice this question on the wiki/faq: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/UseCases#What_is_best_practice_when_partitioning_a_device_that_holds_one_or_more_btr-filesystems and as it hasn't been answered, can anyone make any comments on the subject Various things come to mind: a) partition the disk, create an LVM partition, and create lots of small LVs, format each as btrfs b) partition the disk, create an LVM partition, and create one big LV, format as btrfs, make subvolumes c) what about using btrfs RAID1? Does either approach (a) or (b) seem better for someone who wants the RAID1 feature? d) what about booting from a btrfs system? Is it recommended to follow the ages-old practice of keeping a real partition of 128-500MB, formatting it as btrfs, even if all other data is in subvolumes as per (b)?